Share this article:
 Digg.com Facebook Google Bookmarks N4G Gamerblips del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot.org StumbleUpon and who's fault is that then?,you can't expect the price you are asking AND for people not to ask you to lower it I thought they were already losing money on every PlayStation they sell from the start? Oh for god sake!!!!! Its only £280 quid get a grip!!!!! While I agree that the Activision boss made unnecessary comments, this guy should have kept a dignified silence and let it go. Everyone knows Activision won't drop the PS3. I think the Sony bloke is more than entitled to voice his opinion as imo the media treatment of them is a little harsh. We would all like a price cut and i would bet my house that we will get a significant one before the end of the year. At which time I will probably be buying a PS3. I would buy one now if the ****ing thing could play PS2 games, sheesh 'LOGIC DOES NOT EXIST IN THIS DOJO, DOES IT!?'
'NO SENSEI!!!'
:lol: and to people who have lost their jobs in the recession and what money they do have going to kepping a roof over their heads, then you speak like a guy who lives at home, dosnt pay rent or bills and parents who are well off, as in not to worry.
It might only be 280 quid, but it's still about 130 quid too expensize for most people. hence why it lies in 3rd place. HEAVEN OR HELL?
REBEL 1
FIGHT! I personally am more interested in the whole possably PS3 having PS2 playable again that was reported week ago or so. I holding off till Sony confirm or deny this will be happening in future PS3s before i buy one. Trouble is mate you can buy a 360 with most of the same games for a fraction of that price, hence why a lot of people are waiting for the price cut. There just aren't enough exclusives at this time to justify the massive price difference between two machines that have virtually identical game libraries when it comes to the big sellers. Agreed. I thought the Sony fellow's comments about applying pressure to each other and that being the nature of business was entirely fair. Using your argument they should stick to playing their ps2s and save the money they need to keep a roof over their head compared to buying any other console, especially one likely to need replacement in 6 months. A console is a luxury item and as such is priced.
Still I agree, its too much for the majority.
Nevertheless there are people who have jobs and work for their money, not everyone is a banker...so take your foot out of your mouth please. Losing money on consoles is something the industry has done for years. I don't know how long it took previous generations to become profitable.
Sony took something of a risk building a high spec, high price console, yet plenty of people see the value of the tech in the extra the price. But I'm guessing more people see a console that is close on twice the price of a premium 360 but basically identical when it comes to games (and some people feel is inferior).
But anyway, yeah he's probably right. I'm sure the activision guy is just posturing.
But I did see my first TV ad mentioning the PS3 since KZ2 in Feb - Transformers 2. Way to pick the titles to make a song and dance about!! Extactly my opinion. I love Motorstorm, Resistance, LBP and Killzone, yet thats not enough on its own to spend up to £300 on a console. Maybe by christmas when more exclusives are out ill consider one if a price drop doesnt happen. They are. Although it's come down a heck of a lot.
They were loosing over $100 per system, it's now down to around $50.
The trouble Sony have about reducing the price, is even if they get to break even point and drop the price, they will return to where they are now.
Their profits will suffer by the amount of the cut multiplied by the number of units sold, so probably 6 - 7 million units at $50, or around $300 - 350 million. That's a great, greatDeal of money to loose....hence the decision not to cut the price at the moment! I would have thought that if you had just lost your job then the last thing you should be thinking of buying is a console, regardless of what price it is. Activision makes a lot noise ----- rather like Scrooge McDuck swimming in his piles of money.
Unlike Mr Stringer who's only noise is weeping into his balance sheet
:lol: It's not just bankers that have lost their jobs in this recession. It's not just Activision though, is it?
Valve don't see it as worth their while to put the extra effort in to do PS3 versions of their hits, and even Tecmo-Koei have made statements requesting a price cut on the hardware:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=218823
You can bet for every publisher that's making public statements, there are a whole load more who keeping quiet on the subject for one reason or another, but thinking the same thing when they look at their financial reports. I bought my PS3 for 425 when released here (UK)and due to browsing the net, watching iplayer, watching youtube and other streaming sites (FREE), transfering media (CD to mp3, wmv etc), playing exclusives like drake, GT5, resis 2, LBP,Infamous ,motor storm PC, MGS 4, KZ2 etc, watching blu ray discs on 1080p, with remotes designed not to buy an addition plug and play, access to home (FREE) with negative comments aside Ive met lots of people etc I could really go on all day, it was worth the price and Ive sold my xbox and wii.
299 is a bargain, you can pay this for a blu ray player alone let alone a multi media hub. I think if people knew what sony included into PS3 then they'd stop slating it as much and buy 1. I just want to add, all this (iplayer etc) via my shiny 50inch HD telly, not a PC monitor Have been thinking about this and in all honesty I can see where Valve are coming from.
Irrespective of the fact that 360 ports yield greater sales for relatively lower dev effort there is also the fact that the inevitably sub-par ports will in some manner be reflected on the developer.
Take, for instance, The Orange Box. The PC and 360 versions garnered a mind-blowing 96% whilst the unfortunate PS3 was languishing in last with a relatively lowly 86%.
Whilst the more astute of us know that it is the hardware that is to fault it must nonetheless be frustrating for Valve. Kind of like them being given a wire brush to buff a Lamborghini. :? But what about the people who want a games console only? That's why people like me are put off. Well, price is one factor - for me it is also about owning an additional console that is pretty much identical for gaming, only to play the handful of games that I can't get on my 360.
And I would feel exactly the same about buying a 360 now if I already had a PS3. For me there's not enough difference between the two to warrant owning both. Yeah, I'm the in the same boat.
I'm only interested in games and - while titles like Dragon Age (which looks exactly like my sort of thing) and Last Guardian look amazing - I don't really feel the need to get another console that offers little more than my 360 does.
I price-cut would make the package a lot more tempting, however.
:) When it comes to business you cant beat somebody called 'Stringer'. I've just read this, from Bioware:
http://www.videogamer.com/news/bioware_really_pumped_to_work_on_ps3.html
It seems not all developers have the same attitude. In fact, I am really looking forward to Dragon Age. Right back at you: what about the people who want MORE than just a games console?
Right now, if you want a high res games console and you want to be able to watch blu-ray, you have to buy an XBox 360 and either a seperate blu-ray player, or a PC with decent specs (too low spec and those high res movies stutter). Or you could just buy a PS3. @English Shmuppet
Blaming the hardware?
Valve have out sourced development for all their ps2 and ps3 releases and have openly said they don't have the people with the knowledge in house to get teh best out of the ps3.
Look at what Naughty Dog are capable of. Either the hardware isn't actually the problem its the developers or Naughty Dog are super human.
Personally i'm interested how the newly announced Google Chrome OS can change the shape of PC gaming Rabble rabble rabble rabble. activision are ****ing gay. only for reference, for the people who want to be able to watch 1080p bluray movies on xbox just go here... (way better than sh*t torrents as youre not sharing files at any point so cant be done for filesharing ever, plus the download speed is as fast as your own net connection can go).
http://tehparadox.com/forum/f89/
and here for the converter that converts the mkv file with same bitrate as original bluray disc...
http://www.videora.com/en-us/Converter/Xbox360/
either stream the movie if your router lets you, or just drag onto a usb stick and stick the usb stick into the front of your 360, bobs your uncle and fannys your aunt.... :wink: I payed £299 for my PS3 when Killzone 2 came out and I think it was well worth the asking price, it's a fantastic media player and has some top games. And free online is a very big plus point. I own all three consoles this gen and think the Wii is the over priced one out of the three. I'm not sure I would agree with your well thought out and informative argument. fair play to Stringer, he knows the publishers are just looking out for themselves and he's doing the same. Maybe Sony should start doing some outrageous bundles with their 1st party titles in order to up the sales.
If for £290 you got half a dozen games and a couple of bluray's then i would be just as tempted as waiting for the unti price to come down. Take away PS3's free internet browser.
take away the free Home service.
take away the free Music Video service.
take away the Blu Ray player (and the ability to expand games such as MGS4 and limit them to DVD) and with that gone, buy seperate Bul Ray playerd for 299 instead
take away it's charger cables (yip, lets choose to buy our own).
Take away the potenial of the Cell and lessen the quality of games such as KZ2, Uncharted 2, Guardian etc
take away its Hard Drive (why not, xbox can)
take away its wireless feature (why not, xbox can)
take these away and more and your left with a cheap console that plays games for sure but the future potenial of games are limited, like xoboxs, and it's little more than a PS2 with shiny knobs on.
Wii done this technic with it's machine from Gamecube and look at the quality it offers, hardly any, yet its cheap and sells bucket loads! Sony, people dont want you to expand and push boundries, they want you to cheapen things and sell tosh. Wii games or xbox DVD limitations? Ummmmm ... hope you learn your lesson sony although personally I was delighted with what you've produced. I sold my xbox to a mate and it got RROD 4 months later, kudos to MS! Well my post was in response to a post that stated all the benefits the PS3 has as an all in one device that makes it not massively overpriced. Which I agree with. I was just representing another side to the argument.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at; am I supposed to throw it back at you again and say what if people ONLY want a games console?? Because we will be here all day! I had a 360 and my laptop has a blu ray drive on it, so why would i want to pay twice as much for a system with pretty much the same games? I have 1 blu-ray dvd and i suspect i am in the majority that don't really care about blu-ray discs (yet?). on storage capacity, i couldnt care less if a game comes on 1 disc or 3-4, im used to it with PS1 and PC games of old. Also if you network your PC to your 360 you can stream High quality video to your tv. As i said before the PS3 is great but at the moment there arent enough exclusives for me to pay that premium I dont get why people say there aren't enough exclusives for the ps3. Know what games I own for the 360? gears of war 1 and 2 and halo 3 .... Thats it. Halo 3 isn't as good as people say (didn't like it enough to finish it). Gears 1 and 2 are okay but now I finished them both I dont play them. And as ps3 games I own LBP, KZ2, Uncharted, Motostorm 2, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, MGS4, Resistance 2. not to mention all the multiplatform titles and the PSN games I got. Games I want for xbox..... none at this time (was Alan Wake but interest in that died for me about 6 months ago). for ps3 GT5, Uncharted 2 and God of war 3 So I really don't know why people say there is no games on ps3 but end of the day its possibly down to individual taste. But saying there is not enough games is pure ignorance. dont buy a ps3 then...
simple i'd have thought. bit of a non statement there. the very last sentence would have done. well not really, but ok »
absolutely retarded.
for one blu-ray you need to download 296 seperate chunks (sit and download 296 parts, good waste of a day) @ 100MB each.
or you could just get a life and buy a blu-ray.
downloading 30GB for one movie aint worth it. and will probably piss off your ISP. that was interesting.
an example of a real developer. get fired up about the positives, and workaround any negatives.
although he didnt even report any negatives - saying the ps3 had its advantages and they had graphic memory left over (when asked if developing was a struggle) and that was their first ps3 game.
if they can do it, you have to ask why valve cant... hey gogo don't forget the 360 has got fable 2, forza, halo wars, star ocean, two human, banjo kazoiee.. yawn... and the average list goes on and on... but hey we love our 360 cos it's the only place to get Halo3 and Gears of War. :roll: And it's nastily cheap :lol: As for Stringer having a go at Activision. Why not? If it wasn't for the initiative of console makers, eg, Atari, Sega, Ninty, M$ or Sony where the hell would these greedy developers make their money? On the iphone or nokia phones?! Could stick to PCs I suppose. »»
I agree. I'd just buy a PS3, or at least the £100 Sony Blu-Ray player if you care about HD movies that much. Sure blueblade, watch Blu Rays on your laptop, Ill keep my PS3 connected to my 50 inch tele and watch em properly lol.
PS3 exclusive line up far better than Xboxs so Id hardly say much the same games (taken from gogo65uk: LBP, KZ2, Uncharted, Motostorm 2, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, MGS4, Resistance 2 followed by GT5, Uncharted 2, Agent, Guardian, Heavey Rain, R&C, Mod Racer and God of War 3 etc). In fact Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are better than any Xbox FPS exclusive (unless you dig Halo 3). Drake 2 looking like a suitable rival to Gears 2.
Whats the point of creating a media hub like PS3 then stripping it to a shell, its a bargain as it is. I agree that Wii is the most over priced out of the 3 tho. Ive come to realise that out of the 3 machines, the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii.
Which is the best machine? Definately PlayStation 3.
Which has the best exclusive line up? Definately PS3.
Which is the most over priced? Definately Nintendo Wii.
Which has the best future line up? Definately PlayStation 3.
Which offers the best future potenial? Definately PlayStation 3 (Blu Ray storage, Cell, reliability etc).
Which offers the best online support? Definately PlayStation 3 (free browser, free gaming, free home, free music video service, Resistance 2 60 player online, MAG 256 player online, Divx Flash WMV etc support). Anyone who can't afford the ps3 is either unemployed or extremely tight. I'm a student with a part time pub job and I can afford one! Get off your fat arses, stop paying monthly for live and get a playstation 3 for £280! It's not that much for a machine that is way ahead of the rest of the market in terms of tech and ability. All this ******** chat about PS3 having hardly any exclusives...wake the hell up people:
Uncharted 1 (& soon 2 which I'm sure will kick the first ones ass)
Killozone 2
LBP
Resistance 1&2
Motorstorm 1&2
GoW III
InFamous
The Last Guardian
GT 5
and probably some I've missed but still - a great selection of games there and yet some people still play the 'no exclusives' card?
360 only has exclusive shooters really and Wii has exclusive piles of shit for it's pile of shit console.
I'm not saying that PS3 is better than 360, because this is what it really boils down too, but in value terms the PS3 offers a lot of things and you can't argue with that.
For all those who 'just want a console' I imagine within a month of owning a PS3 if you had a HDTV you'd buy a Blu-ray or use the wiFi or any of the added features.
It is expensive but it offers a lot too. »»
296 seperate chunks (rars)???!!!!, thats if you have the full contents as well as the film including extras and all soundtracks (languages) yes.... who wants all that tho unless its a film they really really want to collect (i buy them if i like them that much). on that forum i posted the link to (if you looked), they literally extract only the film from the bluray disc and post the links to the rars theyve broke it down into on rapidshare etc. a 720p film is 4.5gb on average and double that for 1080p, remember its only the film itself they post the links to, and as for you suggesting to 'sit down and download 296 parts', you obviously have only ever used a browser to download from such sites as rapidshare, thats what download managers are for (i use 'free download manager'), you just copy the links from the forum onto your clipboard, open your download manager up and paste the links in and leave it downloading it all for you and go and have a cuppa, a 720p film takes me 90mins to download, a 1080p double that (i have a an 8meg connection). and im with satan of all ISP's AOL and they have never throttled me or sent me letters. the speed it downloads at is whatever maximum speed your phoneline/package is capable of. do your research before spouting off.....
and for your info i actually watch the 1080p/720p films i download on my ps3 because it is slightly quieter than the 360, all i was doing was showing 360 only owners that they can actually enjoy 1080p movies without shelling out £250 just for watching 1080p films....
ps- no quality is lost either from the original bluray as my friend and i did an experiment round his, he owns the bluray of 'cars', and wrote down the bitrate when playing it through his ps3 (press select for that info if you dont know), he then played cars downloaded from that site (theres others out there, you dont have to use that site), and the bitrate was exactly the same.. Randy, please check your personal messages, I'm selling magic beans for £280 each.
To be honest, I didn't think I'd ever sell any, but your assurances that you don't think that £280 is too much to pay for.. well, anything, have once again filled me with with a sense of hope.
I'm sure you will be satisfied with your magic bean, it is far ahead of the other beans on the market in terms of tech and ability, because it's magic. (Leaving aside of course that when an ordinary bean and my magic bean are compared side-by-side, my magic bean always comes off looking worse.) Maybe someone should give him a "bell"? :wink: Trouble with downloading is the "purchase" of extra space. Without extra space, you need to delete the file (in particular a big nasty memory hungry HD file).
If you want to watch Blu Ray quality movies and play decent games along with all the multi-platform greats then buy a PS3. I bought Bladerunner on Blu Ray for £15, baragin, but to download and delete it after a viewing or 2 just simply wouldn't do the classic any justice.
This is to own, and play on a big tele, in HD, and then to play something else, then go back and watch again, PS3 offers the best availability for this. I guess I just prefer to own the disc and it's shiny wrapper rather than deletable invisible digital content. i looked at that site, randomly looked at beowulf - it had 296 parts @ 100MB each. which is about 30GB.
you need ALL parts to unrar.
unless you pay a subscription, you need to wait 15 minutes after EVERY download to start a new one.
so 3 hours for a 1080p - your dreaming. probably even if you have a membership... which would be better spent on a ps3 and blu-ray discs itself. There's so many pros and cons for each system I really don't know how anyone could advocate one console over another!!
I do own all 3 of the latest consoles and whilst I agree that the 360 has had it's issues -failure rates, bloody noisy, wifi not built in ect- it's still been a great games machine. I'm more than happy to pay £40 a year for live as my personal opinion is it's much better than ps3's offering (free or not). And don't even bother mentioning the complete waste of time that is HOME!
Really enjoyed gears of war and mass effect, as i did uncharted and wipeout. I personally think both consoles are priced about right for what they offer, if you want ones paticular features over another. So we're agreed, the best thing to do is buy a standalone Blu-Ray player and an Xbox 360 and enjoy the best of both worlds. ... or buy a decent console that does both. omg that devil never crys guy is hitman bazza in diguise :lol: (transformer theme tune)
ok lets get the 360 list out which is much better
halo 3
gears of war 1 and 2
pgr3 and 4
forza 2
fable 2
viva pianta 1 and 2 and party animals(for the kids)
crackdown
blue dragon
condemmed 1
lost odessy
dead or alive 4
perfect dark zero
dead rising
gta:lost and dammned
halo wars
left 4 dead
mass effect
ninja gaiden 2
ninety nine nights
prey
and i cba naming more :lol: i could also name the soon to come exclusives but again i cba sad. Jesus the amount of fanboy comments on this thrad is bloody scary.
Saying that ps3 has better exclusive games is a matter of opinion & some that are saying that here are clearly not owners of both consoles.
Truth is most people just want a games console its sony's own fault for trying to release one all singing all dancing unit yes it may be worth the money if you "want" all those features but most people I know who have a ps3 only wanted a games console & a lot of them have been dissapointed with it in that respect.
And never say never as regards to developers dropping formats that their games under perform on expecially when they have to code some of those games entirely different to PC & 360 versions thus costing them more in dev costs if they spend say 5 million on a ps3 game & only get a return of 3.5m then where is the sence in that?
All console makers with the exception of nintendo this gen make a loss on the console & it has been this way pretty much since consoles were first made so why sony are complaining about that I do not know.
They are on their 3rd generation now you would think they would understand the nature of the beast by now. It's quite funny to see people bringing up the same old arguments about the PS3 media capabilities, web browser, transferring music, wireless etc etc.
If you're using your PS3 wirelessly, then it's odds on that you probably already had a wireless router.......and most likely a desktop or laptop PC
meaning you already had that functionality before you got a PS3 anyway. Basically, all the PS3 gives the average household is an expensive games console which is virtually identical to the 360 (which is half the price) and a very average Blueray Player. Most people who want the quality of Bluray will get a standalone player which again, is much less than PS3.
What's even funnier, is watching everyone trying to justify the cost of their beloved console. ps3 has awards for one of the best blu-rays players out.
saying its very average comes from the mouth of an uninformed fanboy. Tell me this, most people have access to a laptop/PC and broadband these days.
So does the PS3 really give value for money when you compare the features that are left against the 360? I'd say no at this moment in time because the GAMES (and BR playback) do not justify the increase in price when you already have all the media capabilities done a lot better at your fingertips.
If you don't have access to a PC/laptop, then there is more of an argument there, but the functionality is still limited. Personally I'd take a cheap laptop every day of the week for the music and web browsing....and that doesn't even begin to touch on the additional flexibility that you'd get. Really? Was that award dished out in the November 2006 release of 'Official Playstation Magazine'? the increase in quality alone justifies the increased price.
dont know what your are rabbitting on about pcs for. we are into CONSOLE gaming. might as well have a console with BR playback and free online gaming.
you can get that from a pc sure - if your a 360 fanboy. otherwise, why bother?! Oh - the rodent is in....she just cannot keep her mouth shut can she. sad *******. cant take it your budget console has half the features and half the quality of a ps3?! i have a rapidshare premium account which i pay 17 euro every quarter which doesnt break the bank so i never have to wait, especially with the amount of films i watch. the Beowulf one you refer to is the full disc including extras, deleted scenes, all language soundtracks... you must have searched hard for that cos theres not that many posts of full versions of bluray discs on that site, 99% of the posts in the hd section of the forum is just the film on its own (which lets face it what you want to watch unless youre a big fan of a particular movie) which is again i state - 4.5gb for 720p on average, double for 1080p on average...
if i like a film enough i do actually buy the film, so dont try and call me a cheap skate, if i bought every film id watched id be in debt upto my eyeballs and id have no room for them all. and yes i know you need ALL parts to unrar anything thats been split with winrar, ive been using it for donkeys years, i dont need lessons from the likes of you, they have extracted only the film from the bluray and then archived it into rars (usually 23 if its in 200mb rar files or 46 if its in 100mb files). christ, ive been doing this for years and theres no way you can tell me anything about it i dont know, im not disputing the fact that a full bluray disc with all the extras on is 30gb, what i have been relaying is that if you only want the film to watch in full hd and no extras then it is available to do so very easily in 720p 4.5gb or double for 1080p... 1 bluray disc is on average £15, thats nearly 3 months worth of downloading as many films as i like in hd. some films i will want the extras and then i will go and buy it. it is illegal what i do but if you stand by your words that each time i want to just watch a film in 1080p i have to download 30gb worth of rar files then im banging my head up against a brick wall....
here, 3 1080p posts in the hd section without extras etc -
http://tehparadox.com/forum/f89/untouchables-1987-1080p-bluray-dts-es-x264-ctrlhd-415587/
http://tehparadox.com/forum/f89/driven-kill-2009-1080p-bluray-x264-sector7-388464/
http://tehparadox.com/forum/f89/dark-knight-2008-1080p-bluray-dts-x264-esir-198245/ Hello person living in the 1980's! You'll probably be amazed by this, but early in the 1990's, they'll make it possible to connect PCs up to television screens! Unbelievable, isn't it? You're speaking as though the only function of the PS3's blu-ray drive is to play movies. Quite clearly that's not the case (hint: games also come on blu-ray discs). Grasshopper and starsail, you guys need to shut up. Bluray is irrelevant as you can see, because no one buys ps3's. We are talking about consoles that are made to play games, not movies. If you think that the ps3 has better exclusives than the xbox than you have been smoking a fat blunt because you have nothing. You lost gta, final fantasy, and now metal gear, so you cling onto little big planet and killzone? Your online is free, thats fine and dandy, but at least microsoft uses the money they make off of live to upgrade the servers to make online play tolerable, and to go out and pay for exclusives. So from a gaming point of view, I see no reson to justify 200 extra dollars for crap games and the same visuals. Grasshopper and starsail, you guys need to shut up. Bluray is irrelevant as you can see, because no one buys ps3's. We are talking about consoles that are made to play games, not movies. If you think that the ps3 has better exclusives than the xbox than you have been smoking a fat blunt because you have nothing. You lost gta, final fantasy, and now metal gear, so you cling onto little big planet and killzone? Your online is free, thats fine and dandy, but at least microsoft uses the money they make off of live to upgrade the servers to make online play tolerable, and to go out and pay for exclusives. So from a gaming point of view, I see no reson to justify 200 extra dollars for crap games and the same visuals. beowulf was the very first, and only one i (randomly) clicked on. i didnt search for it on purpose - its right there on the front page.
stopped reading your arguement after that for your cheek.
700 meg axxo's are pushing it. gigabytes worth for a movie isnt worth the HDD space, time or effort.
if i want an HD movie, i'll 'splash out' the £15 if its worth keeping, if its not then a throwaway 700mb file is all it warrants. welcome to 2009, its now possible to play blu-rays through your CONSOLE. no fannying about.
now thats unbelievable! The only reason it is considered too much money is that even after all the hype it doesn't have any killer games. Little Big planet, came and went. KZ2 came and went. MGS came and went. GT5 came and...Oh wait it still hasn't come. no you didnt stop reading it, you realised how much of a twit youd been and realised youd got no arguement... ill go see if beowulf is in todays postings even...
if you dont believe that 1080p movies are 10-15gb (and thats just the main feature im talking about) then your ignorance is evident for all to see.... you go burn your cash on blurays that you dont consider 'amazing'....
ill keep on watching films in sweet 1080p and enjoying them for free, and you can carry on believing or just saying that its not possible, you have a reputation for being a loud mouthed ill informed tit all across this board, carry on... :wink: where the **** did i say you couldnt dl HD movies?!
you've been able to do that for years. common knowledge... arsehole!
i said it isnt worth my time. yours, maybe. :roll: »
no... you actually said 1080p films were only available in 30gb downloads and had to sit at your computer whilst you download 296 files and wait 15mins between files downloading etc etc.. in other words, an uneducated summary...
my viera begs to differ, it displays '1080p input' when i watch my movies that i download... if you want all the bells and whistles such as the extras and all the language tracks (why would you want more than one language???) then yes it will be 30gb, but i just want the main feature, one audio track (english) and thats it.... that equates to between 9gb and 15gb depending on the length of the movie... sorry to disappoint.
so... a quick rundown.... you cant afford 1 minute to look on a hd movie forum, highlight some text, open a small program, and then paste the text into that program, and then carry on with what you were doing???? the process actually takes less than a minute, you dont have to supervise your pc whilst it downloads you know..... you, would much rather go down the shop and buy a mediocre movie or movie that isnt your cup of tea after all when you've watched it, and then regret buying it???
im glad ive only had the pleasure of meeting you on here and not in a pub...
a**ehole?????? moi??
banhammer please mods.... Kotick, and various other interested parties are making these so called noises because they can see what an abortion you're making of what is a great piece of kit that is quickly becoming a non viable system to develop for, due to the price-point and units out there, in direct correlation against the development budget!
Argue 'til you're blue in the face about the merits of the tech., but the uptake, or rather lack thereof is scaring the industry and will ultimately lose further high profile studio's. *applause*
Some people in this thread need a reality check. You know what man, for once, I totally agree with you. Why bother to try to replicate all the functionality that the PS3 has by taking ridiculously labourious courses of action, when you could just bite the bullet and get a PS3.
It's the people who DON'T want all that functionality that have some issues with the price. If you have no interest in connecting to the net, high def movies, yadda yadda, then the PS3 offers very little, almost nothing, over the 360, and is twice the price, or there abouts. »
its not a laborious process though, it takes less than a minute to set a download up, lot less laborious than going the shop for a film, or even ordering one off the net, or posting stuff on here for that matter...and youre not feeling let down after watching a movie youve been hyped over see-ing and bought it and felt let down by the movie after watching it...
and for the record, i have a ps3, i was just letting '360 only' owners know (in my original post) that they dont have to spend £250 to watch 1080p movies.... thats all i was saying and then he attacks me like ive called his mum bad things. ********.
downloading average quality movies is one thing. (700mb) but downloading full 1:1 1080p rips is likely to get you thrown in the tin.
you think your IP doesnt know what your downloading?
wouldnt waste my time, bandwith or hard drive space downloading HD movies on a whim.
just aint worth it - especially being the owner of a ps3! anyone with sense will know if a movie is worth buying. if your let down, your casually downloading nonsence like its tv rips off a torrent site.
as if the average 360 owner is going to have a subscription to rapidshare and unlimited download usage anyway, never mind a 1080p screen...
amazon is one-click purchase. finding pirated rips, downloading all the parts and unraring them is not less laborious. dont talk shite. Sony are right... why should they reduce the price of the PS3. It's hardly going to sell many more. They understand this which is why they don't reduce the cost.
The fact is there are those who love Playstation and those that don't care much for it. Those that love it already have one. They don't need a price reduction, and the chances are they'd have paid whatever price tag Sony stuck on their console. The casual PS fan, or those thinking it's too expensive are very much suggesting the price they're willing to pay for gaming doesn't stretch that far, or their desire for the machine isn't that great. How big a group is this? Sony clearly believe it's a small number, that would hardly help them. I think they're right.
Talk features all you like, or the price, but Sony's initial delay gave Microsoft the chance to grab a few of their customers. And judging by the numbers who owned a PS2 and an original Xbox, I'd say they've taken a massive slice out of Sony's market.
As for Blu-ray; it's taking off so slowly, DVD will continue to hold the market until download movies (or a better system!) completely kill of Sony's high definition movie system. You only have to look at how few people have hi-def cable or satellite TV to understand it's just not in high enough demand. And without surround sound you're only getting half the experience. Surround sound still only interests a small minority, compared to all the people who own TVs. Budget console? which one is that then? reading your previous comments, it costs more to get the Xbox fully kitted out than it does to buy a PS3. So...in that case my PS3 must be my budget console.
Unlike you who 'claims' to have owned both I actually do and can form an opinion.
I am sure you have been violated by a MS employee at some point. It truly is not normal for someone to spend so much time and effort waging such a hate campaign against a games console!!
I feel sorry for you. Precisely. You just summed up my perspective on this matter to a tee. Difference being that it is possible to buy one of the other consoles and a stand alone Blu-Ray player for a lower price combined than that of the PS3. Price is king. bafoon.
the 360 costs more to "kit out" because all the extras - that come as standard on the ps3 - are sold seperate at extortionate prices. the console itself is still a budget affair.
no hate campaign, i can just see the ps3 is the better quality console. and i hate cheapness. I wouldn't hold my breath for the proposed Google OS to set the world on fire. It will be based on the same open-source software that we have seen in existing open-source OS'es which have barely scratched the paint of the OS tank that is known as "Windows". Sure, it's not impossible for Google to launch an OS that can mount a more credible challenge than previous attempts, but they're going to have to provide the same options and abilities as the paid-for versions of Windows do and - this is the really important part - they must make their OS at least as easy to use for existing and new Windows users as the most user friendly aspects of Windows. At the end of the day the vast majority of PC users simply want their OS to work (more or less,) without them having to be well versed in the mysterious and confounding world of programming. Many of those people are willing to pay money to avoid having to wrestle with that particular bugbear. »
price is king if your a tramp.
ps3 is head and shoulders above the 360 in quality - with a quality BR player built in.
only a miser would buy two stand alone machines, that are BOTH of INFERIOR quality instead of one machine that does them both - for a few extra quid saving. you can be sure that "saving" will come back to bite you in yer arse. :roll: Nice to see you taking your own advice to heart when the first bit, "don't buy a PS3 then...", would have sufficed going by your stated sentiment above. :roll: What a laugh. You forgot to add the all important, "In my opinion" bit. As others have already touched upon, why should I when I'm only interested in my console as a *games machine*? Speaking of being way ahead in terms of tech and ability my PC pisses on the PS3 and I can upgrade just about every single piece of hardware in it whenever I choose to meaning I don't need to be stuck with an outdated piece of tech for X amount of years unless I choose to go that route...but I don't hear you crowing on about that. Is it inconvenient? »
You surprise me....you come across cheap with your pathetic comments every day!!
How anyone can say they hate cheap but tolerate the basics the PS3 gets wrong is beyond me. As I have said before, this is 2009. Online is key and the PS just DOES NOT GET IT RIGHT. The dashboard is also terrible!! its dead...nothing. No news features, videos etc....
Bluray is simply a glorified DVD. Quality is good, but what else does it offer that DVD doesnt? Sky can give me HD and not charge me 15-20 quid per movie.
You should either grow up or go visit a shrink, because your obsession with hating Xbox is jut not normal. Not that you should be commenting anyway...as you dont own one. get a grip. read that fanboy statement you just wrote.
i had 2 360's. one when the ps3 wasnt out, which died. and one when it came down in price and the HDD went as standard from 20-60GB, to compliment my ps3 - sold it in a matter of weeks as it looked and sounded ghastly next to the ps3. wasnt so bad when i only had a 360 with nothing to compare it to. but post-ps3, it got shown up... its absolute cheap shite which is priced accordingly. Wow. You would have fit right in during the McCarthy era where Communist witch hunts were in full swing. Do you perchance understand the concept behind the term "nuance"? »»
Perhaps for some. Then there are others, like myself, who simply find little logical sense in throwing out good money on something that is of little interest and/or is already present in other items owned. You were speaking of common sense earlier, now would be a good time to bring it to bear.
Are *all* stand alone Blu-Ray players of inferior quality to the one in the PS3? Are *all* of the stand alone Blu-Ray players that are superior to the one in the PS3 more expensive?
As for the potential issues that can arise with various items purchased that's what warranties and insurances are for. Welcome to a modern-day consumer society. **** does that have to do with the statement?!
you do homework. read user reviews. you'll already know if you like the actors involved, the subject matter. either buy the movie or steer clear.
is this you trying to act smarter than you actually are again?! :roll: So you mean you are (to use your words) a TRAMP? you cannot afford both now? Now I get it!! you maybe werent violated by MS, just you are poor.
Fanboy? perhaps, but I own a PS3 and play the exclusives, use it as my DVD player - as most PS owners do, plus I have two 360s. As I use BOTH very regularly, I can comment that the PS3 is not the quality you think it is. »»»
http://reviews.cnet.com/best-blu-ray-players/
ps3 rates 2nd place out of ten BR players. the ps3 is roughly same price as the number one player, as its price has come down since then. say $350 for each. why wouldnt you also want a games console thrown in? the 4th best player is about $450. over priced, under functioned and less performance. »
When "conversing" with you little acting is required, I can assure you. What you are alluding to is highly subjective and thus stating that anyone with "sense" will know is a hugely short-sighted sentiment to hold. If you do not grasp the patterns in this particular weave then any effort made to continue arguing those finer points will be wasted. I like to think you can grasp them should you make the effort, however, I am disinclined to invest my own time and efforts in your struggle to do so. »»»»
Now this is the only thing I will ever agree with you on. The PS3 is without doubt a fantastic Bluray player - probably the best. Why anyone would buy a Bluray player and not a PS3 is beyond me?? of course unless people are on a budget - nothing wrong with that of course.
Its the games console part you confuse too often. PS3 simply is not in the same league as Xbox for a gaming 'experience'. PS has some fantastic exclusives...but as the sales volumes show, who cares??? I like them, but once the single player is done...thats it. »»»»
Online awards are all well and good - they can help reassure a customer after all. What is of far greater interest to me, and from a scientific aspect as well, are the specifications of a given BR player. So spare me the dog-and-pony awards show and let's get some by-the-numbers direct spec comparisons which should then be followed by live eye inspection of the image quality (which then also involves the model of TV involved, etc). thats your opinion.
i tried live for a month and it wasnt any more fun than PSN.
played many matches of CoD4, totally lag-free... im confused what else do you want?! »»»»»
it didnt rate second out of ten because it performed badly.
PS3 Media Player Blitzes Blu-ray Specs
July 2nd, 2009
A couple of days ago, I noted on the Digital Foundry Twitter feed that enterprising coders had found a way to make the PlayStation 3 significantly outperform the Blu-ray spec by enabling video playback of 1080p material at 60 frames per second. The average Blu-ray movie runs at 24FPS while the system's 1080i conformity gives it a notional top-end of 30FPS. But PlayStation 3 goes way beyond that, seemingly without breaking a sweat.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-blitzes-blu-ray-specs-blog-entry
a link for science-boy. So... The PS3 is better because it can render movies with more frames-per-second?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Oh, I'm sorry, I shouldn't be so dismissive of your... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
That's awesome. I wish my DVD player could add more *chortle* frames-per-second to my *snigger* movies.
I'm sorry old man, but your science is weak. loser. better than what?!
its a more than competent BR player, that technically beats players that are of a higher price, that dont also have a state of the art games console built-in.
this article shows its got a lot more potential under the hood. and thats being one of the most upated players via firmware.
Since the PS3's debut, we've seen several Blu-ray players from Samsung, Panasonic, LG, and Sony itself. None of them generally perform any better than the PS3, even though they cost more (twice as much or more in some cases). HD movies look superb on the PS3, which can output video at full 1080p resolution via its HDMI 1.3 port. Audio support is also top notch as the PS3 decodes Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio soundtracks internally, outputting them as linear PCM, which should deliver impeccable lossless surround when connected to most HDMI-equipped AV receivers. well youre just showing how much you actually know by saying that, im not discussing it any further with you as you clearly have no clue what youre on about at all, save yourself some face and dont even bother trying to argue as people like me (and there are plenty out there who come on these forums im sure) will be laughing their socks off at you and your uneducated drivel on this matter, im not gonna even entertain reading your posts ever again as you dive head first into something you know absolutely nothing about, on more than this ocassion, in fact numerous ones as youve got a right name for yourself on here.... the matter is closed as far as im concerned because youve just made me realise how little you actually know on the matter, torrents my ass lol, theres a whole community out there you know sweet FA about as youve made very clear, and theres software i use that stops my IP knowing exactly what im downloading, sure they may one day think hes downloading alot, but they wont know what, ooh look, the sunshine bus is here to pick you up, byeeee... :lol: who cares, honestly. do one already. *Chortle* 60fps movies. Awesome.
So, uh... It "technically beats players that are of a higher price", huh? But how does it compare to the players that are selling for half it's price?
Oh, they must suck, they probably only play back movies at a mere 23.97-25fps. :lol: that didnt claw back any dignity. you got shown. »
Best Bluray - I agree.
Can you answer me this please? Why the hell is it sooo slow to download and do anything? Every time I put in a new game it wants a download. That download takes for ever...add that it usually then wants to install something?? Every 2 secs, install someting - WHY???
I have 50MB cable, tried both wired and wireless and have had a replacement PS (first one went kapput). Always the same...snail paced downloads for everything. I downloaded a demo recently and it tooks hrs!! the same download on Xbox took 7 mins! I presume yo have tried Home? ridiculous, again, download -zzzzzzzz - install, totally unacceptable. MGS - install every chapter, what is that all about? The music video thing that launched recently? great software and idea, but boy, how long does it take to load!
Come on - how is that state of the art? i think you know its the PSN servers. sony would have they speeds if everyone who wanted to play online got made to pay a fee every year...
stop trying to tarnish the king of consoles. So then when you say you dont like cheap, why do you have a problem paying for live?? as I have found many time over the years, you only get what you pay for!!
PSN servers explain the download issue, but what about the install rubbish? If I wanted a PC, I would buy one. Consoles are suppose to be quick play. I played and completed Ghostbusters on both consoles recently. Xbox, pick up play, invite easy online etc...Playstation - download update -zzzzzzzz- install - PS2 graphics - online??? does it have one, because even that took a while and as for invites?
PS3 you are paying for a average games console, but a state of the art Bluray player/internet on your TV box. Oh no, I got "shown" by somebody making a fool out of themselves by copy-pasting numbers that they clearly don't understand from another website. :lol:
What's it like being you, SVD?
Dedicating so much of your waking life by trying to show an unappreciative world The True Light and Glory that is the PS3, and constantly being frustrated by so many ignorant voices.
We just don't understand, do we SVD? Us poor souls with our lesser vision of the real world, which the PS3 secretly rules over with a kind yet firm hand.
I bet it makes you so cross, SVD. All you're trying to do is honestly make the world a better place to live in, and yet you constantly get rebuffed by the masses who have been blinded by the Demon that is Micro$oft.
Don't worry, SVD. You stand firm with your faith, and one day all of this hard work will pay off. Sony themselves will descend from the shining clouds that they inhabit to recognise your sacrifice in bring the True Way to the non-believers, and you will be elevated amongst the great, leaving the rest of us behind scrabbling in the dirt with our inferior toys, while you grasp the joypad of the Golden PS3 of Ken Kutaragi himself.
Is that what it's like being you, SVD? I bet it is, isn't it.
Don't worry, lad. Your Crusade for the One True Console will not be for naught. I'm sure that one day your mystical 60fps Blu-Ray player *snigger* (sorry) will stand in true dominion over all Men, where it truly belongs. both arguments for the sake of arguing - save it. you two can pull each other off. For once he is speechless? perhaps at last you have accepted you are wrong??
Hell - let me know and I will buy you an Xbox ;-) I worry for your health when PS3 sinks without a trace. :-) No, no SVD.
It is you who have won the real victory here.
It is so because while sas0875 and I are merely "pulling each other off", as you so eloquently put it, you will be having the what will be the best sex that any human being could possibly experience in both the physical and spiritual realms, with your beloved PS3.
Oh, how your heart must break knowing that so many of us will never know it's loving and tender touch! :cry:
(And it's 60fps Blu-Ray playback, of course.) SVD is a legend in the CVG world. This site would not be the same without him.
The moderators of this site must have a right chuckle. The most amusing thing is bennyboi1979 that said "It's only £280"
Did you notice the bloody recession mate? lol
I did I bloody got laid off and 280 quid is a lot of dosh sunshine.
As for the PS3, people say about Home/Internet Browser/Blu-Ray/Cell Processor etc
What have we really got for forking out that much?
Home is bloody stupid full of teenagers that harass girls on there (Same as everywhere else on the net I suppose)
The Internet Browser is a very very good feature shame on Microsoft for not having one. But I have a PC for NetBrowsing so...I don't really use it but it's GREAT for people that have no computer or don't want the hassle of going to their study or whatever.
Blu-Ray...Not a big fan of it for anything other than movies as any media that requires you to install games where you don't need to on the xbox is a mistake pure and simple. (Sorry guys but 50gb of data doesn't excuse it for myself)
And the Cell processors "Potential"...What bloody potential?? Folding proteins at home doesn't count as potential eurogamer.nets comparison has proven 4 out of 5 games on both consoles look and play better on the x360 and it's only strong point are exclusives.
But on the risk of sounding like a fanboy I'll add that the x360 £5 pound a month is outragous nowdays when the Yanks got a discount one month and us Europeans didn't.
Sony may have their utterly weak points but I say NO to a price drop as at least they don't bloody charge us for online play (All they need is a decent chat system and they rival the XBlive 100%)
And to add this, PC gaming has hit rock bloody bottom due to piracy!
So what am I getting at?
PS3 stays the same price just so they stay alive to make a PS4 to rival Microsoft
Xbox 360 needs to drop XLive charges
PC gamers need to bloody stop pirating and think about what they have done to the gaming scene
...Rant over...
(I ain't no fanboy I hate everything nowdays :P) no, he's one of a number of clueless "gamers" that drag this site down. he's just on one end of the idiotic fanboy war spectrum, while the rest of you are on the other. i swear this place has become as bad (or even worse) than N4G...at least where it concerns posters and their asinine diatribes. One of the best posts in this sea of shite. Well I personally got my consoles to play games funny thing is they both do and very well. The PS3 is value if you want all the gubbins out of the box, MSoft say buy the console cheap but pay as you go on the add-ons which will get you up and running gameswise straight away but you pay the premium on the extras that you may/may not require. Anyone who defends any of these companies to the death when they all lie etc is just madnesss. :idea: :arrow: Then rather than coming here to bitch and whine about it, why don't you piss off to one of these mythical websites where you don't find fanboys taking the mickey out of each other all day.
You know what cvg is like and what the people here get up to, so instead of baaaawwwwing from on high that it's not for you, why don't you just sod off to somewhere that will meet your intellectual expectations.
ffs, I bet you're the sort of muppet who would walk into a pub and complain that the place is full of drunks, or go to a metal gig and complain it's too loud. I have opinions which I wish to impose on you all. Xbox 360s finest
……
mass effect
gears of war 1 and 2
crackdown
dead or alive 4
halo wars
left 4 dead
halo 3
pgr3 and 4
forza 2
fable 2
ninja gaiden 2
gta:lost and dammned (DLC? Oh dear)
(Average or may have been on PS3 if PS3 was released at an earlier stage: lost odessy, condemmed 1, blue dragon, dead rising, perfect dark zero, prey, ninety nine nights, viva pianta 1 and 2 and party animals - for the kids)
PlayStation 3's finest
………
Uncharted 1
Demon Souls
Valkyria Chronicles
Motor Storm 1 and Pacific Rift
White Knight Chronicles
Killzone 2
Little Big Planet
Infamous
Heavenly Sword
Resistance 1 and 2
GT Prologue
Yakuza 3
Ratchet and Clank
Ninga Gaiden 2 Stigma
Metal Gear Solid 4
WarHawk
Wipeout HD
Both formats have awesome titles but PlayStation 3 clearly has the edge (without including average Haze and Lair), plus more franchises have started on PlayStation 3 than Xbox 360. they are both like mobile phones, they can both phone people but you would buy the one with all the features for a higher price(PS3) wouldn't you! instead of the basic cheap unreliable brick!(360) Pot.... Kettle Dude, Condemned was a great game. Hugely atmospheric, and should definitely be considered one of the 360s finest - certainly for an early title.
It's just a shame the sequel didn't live up to the first.
More franchises have started on PS3? Why the hell is that of any relevance? More franchises have started on ps3 hhmmmmm I doubt that
Resistance, Motorstorm, Haze, Lair, Little big planet, uncharted
Those are some off the top of my head, on the 360 off the top of my head
Viva pinata, Crackdown, Mass effect, Gears of war, Blue dragon, Lost odyssey, Kameo, Condemned, Infinite undiscovery, Full auto, Dead rising, lost planet, Left 4 dead,
I think more have started on 360 than ps3 mate sorry. man, I did almost the same. got ps3 for 425...worked for my money. I don't regret buying it at all.thought RE5 would be better, my reason I wanted to buy PS3..turned out to be a lame single player experience. | 
