Ps3: $499/$599

This is exactly why I'm not buying a PS3 when it first comes out. If they're expecting to move 6 million units in the first 5 months they're going to have to seriously reconsider the price point I think. Until that happens, hello Nintendo Wii.

In the meantime, we need more 360 games. I'm getting kinda tired of playing just Halo 2 on it.

Fshk that. >_>

Hi Wii 😉

In the end the 360 and PS3 are going to be too much money and not many people are going to buy them.

Regarding the Wii, all the intellegent gamers that know how to have fun are going to buy it. Then all the ignorant assholes will think its too kiddy and gay.

In result a bunch of guys will have to combine their money to buy the "mature" systems and games. They will be forced all come together at eachothers houses to play it.When 13 guys all hundle up in a room to play one system, then whos gay? hmmmm?

Fuck Sony. Fucking bastards copied the Wii controller like we all knew they would. Assholes.

A while ago, there was an article on why SONY is losing respect from gamers everywhere. I think this is one of the last nails in the coffin. One of them, at least. The thing is, the nail is made of a very valuable stone, and people are willing to fiddle with the nail to test it out.

Although the PS3 will be extraordinarily expensive, it will also be quite the commodity to have. While I doubt that it'll have as limited a supply as the 360, I'm sure there will still be some people selling it for more than it's worth. My friend preordered an XBox360, got one of the first ones, (He works at a GameStop.) and sold it for roughly two to three times what it was worth, since nobody else could get one. I wonder if such a thing would be possible for the PS3.

An expensive piece of crap, like every single other product that Sony has ever made (ask any electronics technician, the extra few hundred you pay for that TV is a complete waste of money). I'm glad to see that even Sony fanboys are tiring of the (awful) Dual Shock controller. I'll never buy one, just like i will not buy any other Sony product.

I'll preorder my Wii after E3, once EBgames have a preorder on record (i'd imagine that will be as soon as the pricepoint is finalised, apparantely EGM said $249US would be the final pricetag, i'll give a source if you'd like, but hell, the conference starts in 3 hours). Rumors were that Nintendo would launch it at $199, but really, that would be stupid on their part. Why not add the extra $50 per console, you're still well over $100 cheaper than the 360, and a half the price of the 20gb PS3.

Britannianhero4 wrote:My friend preordered an XBox360, got one of the first ones, (He works at a GameStop.) and sold it for roughly two to three times what it was worth, since nobody else could get one. I wonder if such a thing would be possible for the PS3.

After all the craziness that went on with the X-Box 360 launch, it's very tempting to try and do that that with the PS3, because you know there will be shortages.

ONeilcool wrote:Regarding the Wii, all the intellegent gamers that know how to have fun are going to buy it. Then all the ignorant assholes will think its too kiddy and gay.

Everyone wants a PS3 already, but they aren't taking in account that its this much money. When I tell them, I usually get a look of disbelief.

Well, the presentation last night just assured a 360 purchase for me, if I ever get something other than the Wii. What arrogant faggots, they take all the neat ideas of other companies, create half-assed implimentations of those ideas, and charge you over 200 dollars more for it. You know you're in trouble when you have to nick ideas from Microsoft.

On top of that, the presentation of games last night was terrible. The presenters were ilterally ASKING for applause because of the mediocrady of most of the games shown there. All right, MGS4 looked neat, and Final Fantasy is Final Fantasy, but there were so many other mediocre titles there, and most defeniatly not worth forking over $600 for.

More like Playstation Wii-Sixty, am i right. 😊

Well, I'm watching the press conference now...and its starting off very "statisticial"...just like last year.

Nintendo is just an hour away.

600 bucks. Thats fucking retarded. But you know all the spoiled 12 year olds will still cry their parents into buying them one so Sony can do whatever they want.

Am I the only one that doesn't really care so long as it offers significantly better titles than the Xbox 360? If it can pull off better graphics and better gameplay, I'd be willing to pay for it. My problem with the Xbox 360 is that it doesn't really seem all that next generation. PS3 may seem more like such. I did see some shots of that FF game and was quite pleased. It looked better than what I'd seen of perfect dark zero.

I'm certainly not a Sony fanboy, infact I think they did a horrible job with both PSX and PS2. Both had major design flaws in my opinion. And they have horrible policys. But given the choice, even if the PS3 costs 200$ more than the Xbox 360, I'll buy it if it can do more, and has games I want. Really, it's nothing new, I've spent thousands on computer technology. Sure it costs more than last time, and it sucks.

The Nintendo Wii ofcourse is much more affordable and sounds to have lots of potential. Which leaves the Xbox 360 as having nothing all that special to offer. And ya I agree the PS3 controller having motion sensors being a lame rip off.

Also a thing about the high price, maybe that'll make it easier for those that actually want it to get it. Sadly not even the PS2's 300$ price tag stopped people from eating them all up. However, 600$, that's a nice step up. 😉

More and more the next gen consoles are starting to look less desireable. So fo the only thing I'm considering getting is the Wii for the back wards compatibility. But im not 100% on that. For now, I'll just stick to my PC.

The Wii has more to offer than the Virtual Console. If that's all you care about, just use your PC for that. The Wii has that unique play control to offer. That is the reason to buy it, that and if you love certain Nintendo series.

I wish these consoles would just die already. They are an outdated method of media delivery now that we have powerful PCs. All games should be made for the PC. The computer should be the one device that does everything and anything.

Glenn the Great wrote:I wish these consoles would just die already. They are an outdated method of media delivery now that we have powerful PCs. All games should be made for the PC. The computer should be the one device that does everything and anything.

I just can't see mario on a computer. Or any of nintendos characters for that matter.

Nintendo and sony would never let anything they own go on a PC if they were smart. Mircrosoft already owns 95% of that market. Industry thrieves off competition. Putting everything on PC would kill the industry of gaming.

I will say that it's far less money and hassle to keep a console updated to play the latest games than it is for a computer. I'd rather pay out $200-$300 every few years for a new console than to spend hundreds on more RAM, hard drive space, replacing the motherboard, processor, video card, etc. And you never have to worry about things like hardware requirements with consoles.

Mottzilla wrote:Am I the only one that doesn't really care so long as it offers significantly better titles than the Xbox 360? If it can pull off better graphics and better gameplay, I'd be willing to pay for it. My problem with the Xbox 360 is that it doesn't really seem all that next generation. PS3 may seem more like such. I did see some shots of that FF game and was quite pleased. It looked better than what I'd seen of perfect dark zero.

That's the problem. The PS3 library is abysmal so far. There's Final Fantasy, and there's Metal Gear Solid, but if you think that is worth SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS for TWO games and a console that can barely do anything else, you're absolutely fucking nuts.

Glenn the Great wrote:I wish these consoles would just die already. They are an outdated method of media delivery now that we have powerful PCs. All games should be made for the PC. The computer should be the one device that does everything and anything.

If you're refering to things like what the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are going after, then fuck yeah, I'd just rather all those games come out on PC.

$499? That's like �400. Fuck that. Gimme a Revolution already. Yeah, that's right - I'm still refusing to call it a Wii. Dear God I hope they change the name back at E3.

And can somebody confirm or deny that the Revolution and the PS3 will be coming out within a week of each other? I don't normally trust what The Sun says, but that does sound scarily accurate...

Everyone still thinks the PS3 will have better graphics and processing power, but from what I've seen and heard thus far, it will be fairly close to the 360 in terms of power. Not to mention the fact that its architecture is way more complex to work with than the 360's. Remember that much of what has been shown thus far is probably fake.

Yeah, see, I've spent a whole lot of money building up my computer, so I'd like the games to be available for it. I don't want to have spent all this money on a good PC, and then have to spend another fortune on a console just so I can play a handful of games for it that I'm interested in. My PC is just as powerful as a 360 or a PS3. My monitor has a much higher resolution than a TV. My PC's sound system is superior to that of my downstairs TV. I am the only one who uses this computer, in contrast to how I have to share the good TV. My computer is already connected to the Internet.

All of those are reasons why it would be best for my games to come out on the PC instead of consoles. A lot of games (particularly ones on the XBox systems) do in fact come out on PC, and the PC version is usually much better. Having a game on the PC is much better because usually you have much more control over the game. You often get a pull-down console, and you can often design your own content. You can get expansions for games if they are on the PC; on a console, you wait for a brand new title. It's much easier to patch a game on a PC if errors make themselves known after release.

Sure, consoles are very low-maintenance compared to a PC, which I think is the reason they are still popular with many people today, but I think the advantages to having a game on the PC are far greater.

AlexMax wrote:That's the problem. The PS3 library is abysmal so far. There's Final Fantasy, and there's Metal Gear Solid, but if you think that is worth SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS for TWO games and a console that can barely do anything else, you're absolutely fucking nuts.

Yup. That's right. Till enough games come out, I wouldn't spend that much. Just like how I don't want to spend 400$ for the 360 when there is 1 game I'd like to play. But I'm just saying that it being expensive doesn't mean it's not worth it. Unless a handful of games will be available at launch that I really am inetrested in, I would never buy one at launch. The Nintendo Wii seems like it will have quite an interesting selection from the start. I'll probably buy that at launch.

The main point though is that even if the PS3 costs a bunch, if it truely is as great as they say and the game support is there, it'd be worth the purchase.

I really don't think the "next generation" is starting off too well. The Xbox 360 has no competition yet. Many people completely ignore current systems (GC, PS2, Xbox). It's like one day they just took those consoles out back, shot them, and threw them in a hole.

About the last new console game I've noticed was the PS2 port of Resident Evil 4. I can't wait to see Resident Evil 5. Now that would make me buy an Xbox 360 or PS3 or whatever the hell it's on.

In the PC vs console debates, I think that certain games fit better on computers and others fit better on a console. However, trying to keep up with the latest advances in computer hardware is very costly.

ONeilcool wrote:I just can't see mario on a computer. Or any of nintendos characters for that matter.

Don't you think it'd be pretty cool to get on your computer and connect to a server that is running Mario Kart, and have a race with 7 other people and no split screen?

Nintendo and sony would never let anything they own go on a PC if they were smart. Mircrosoft already owns 95% of that market. Industry thrieves off competition. Putting everything on PC would kill the industry of gaming.

If games only came out on the PC, the landscape of competition would be different, but it wouldn't adversely effected. If you look at just PC games, there is a good competition environment right now. Everyone will have a computer regardless of competition. The issue will just be focused on the games. It would be better for game companies to produce for the PC because currently consoles are sold at a loss. Removing the consoles would remove a great burden, and with a universal platform (the PC), people can focus more on the games themselves.

Glenn the Great wrote:Don't you think it'd be pretty cool to get on your computer and connect to a server that is running Mario Kart, and have a race with 7 other people and no split screen?

We can already do that with Mario Kart: DS (although it's only with 3 other people instead of 7). But, I'm sure Mario Kart for Wii will have an online component.

It would be better for game companies to produce for the PC because currently consoles are sold at a loss. Removing the consoles would remove a great burden, and with a universal platform (the PC), people can focus more on the games themselves.

With a console you have the luxury of having only one machine to program for. With PCs, you have to take into account numerous different hardware configurations and operating systems (Windows 98, ME, 2000, XP). Which setup sounds like it will give you more time to focus on the actual game?

btw, I've heard that Nintendo rarely if ever sells at a loss.

All consoles sell at a loss. Nintendo's are no exception, though they do sell at less of a loss than Sony and Microsofts'. Last year, Nintendo lost $20 billion Yen on hardware. I just read in the news that it costs Sony $800 to produce one PS3.

If you are a developer who wishes to port a game across many systems, you have to learn the coding nuances of each system. If game companies would program under .NET and DirectX, the process of making games to be run on any Windows system from Win98+ would be rather straightforward. Also, I hear many developers complaining about the relative difficulty to program for a console rather than for the PC.

Here's a general idea of the +s and -s of games on the PC:

Positives: Greater extensability (i.e. mods), more memory, faster processors, better resolution, no cross-platform development issues, no $7 per unit licensing fee
Negatives: Hardware/driver compatability issues (much less of an issue these days), lack of codefied standards, smaller target audience, more difficult copy protection, lack of well-defined 'target platform'

It may seem weird that the PC has a smaller target audience, but most people who have PCs don't have gaming-class PCs. I personally tend to play games on consoles, but that's mostly because I don't want to mess with my PC after working on one all day at work. As for ease of development, the XBox/XBox360 are about as easy to develop for as the PC. Building and running a game on these systems works exactly the same as it does on the PC. PS2 and GameCube are a different story though.

http://snakeps3.ytmnd.com

When there are more games that I want for it, I'll get one. Hell, I didn't get a PS2 until 2-3 years ago.

lol

As I predicted, most of what they showed on the big screen for the PS3 was pre-rendered. They did have playable games on the floor, but most of them looked... flat. The only one I saw that looked impressive was Sword of Heaven, which looks to be a God of War clone. I'd have to say that Project Gotham Racing 3 looks better than Gran Turismo for PS3. But even Sword of Heaven looked to be about par with what you can already find on the 360. The PS3 will be a marginal improvement performance-wise at best.

In order to see truely impressive graphics this year at e3, you had to go to the PC gaming section. A number of games there looked really nice. In particular, Crysis looked absolutely amazing. They had a forested area where you ran through foliage that was fully-articulated and shaded. It was unbelievably detailed. Then you could whip out your gun and shoot a tree until it fell over, leaving branches that persisted for as long as I watched the game.