News

Comment by: vinny13 (Apr 09, 2007 17:18)

It would probably be more popular if it had the exact same features as the 60GB model, but just had less memory.

Comment by: limelight (Apr 09, 2007 18:39)

Originally posted by vinny13:

---

It would probably be more popular if it had the exact same features as the 60GB model, but just had less memory.

---

Why? So games can run slower on the 20gb version? That doesnt make any sense!

Comment by: NexGen76 (Apr 09, 2007 18:57)

Quote:

---

Why? So games can run slower on the 20gb version? That doesnt make any sense!

---

Thats has nothing to do with game's running slow.

Comment by: djeazyg (Apr 09, 2007 19:08)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by vinny13:

---

It would probably be more popular if it had the exact same features as the 60GB model, but just had less memory.

---

Why? So games can run slower on the 20gb version? That doesnt make any sense!

---

The Hard Drive is smaller, not the memory. Except for the Hard Drive both systems are the same. Just depends on how much extra junk you want added to your PS3.
I think they never should have offered the 20gig version. It was pointless for only $100 less.

Why is it so hard for the news people and Sony haters out there to remember that the PS2 when thru the same problems the PS3 is struggling with now. The media wants you to think that Sony is failing. Slow start does not mean failure no matter what the Media and the retarded Sony haters want to think. They will try to back this up with numbers and figures but remember, this happened to the PS2 as well and I doubt that either Sony or MS will EVER share the same success that the PS2 had. Over 7 years later and the PS 2 is still pumping out games that are incredible and can be compared to the 360. I don’t see that ever happening again.
The only difference from the PS2 launch to the PS3 launch is the 360 is there this time and the 360 threat is becoming less and less since they are willing to charge you almost $500 for an “updated” 360. What will the new Xbox they bring out next year cost? The Wii doesn't count in all this because it is on a completely different level than the 360 and PS3.

Comment by: Auslander (Apr 09, 2007 19:08)

beat me to it, nexgen. i think maybe limelight was thinking of RAM, though.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 09, 2007 20:07)

this was SOnys 2nd big mistake (first being tryign to push a 500+ console) the 20GB version is pretty pointless ,the 60gb should have been sold below 500 everything would balance out to the same "loss" and sony would have a better rep ,Messing with BWC is another mistake sony is walking into...

Comment by: bonbillon (Apr 09, 2007 20:52)

Quote:

---

Over 7 years later and the PS 2 is still pumping out games that are incredible and can be compared to the 360. I don’t see that ever happening again.

---

The games of the PS2 can be compared to the 360 in terms that they are GAMES. Because you can't compare the graphics of the PS2 vs the 360. Also the P$3 has some of the same games that the 360 has already in their library and the P$3 is showing some lower graphics and or effects if you compare both of them (360 vs P$3). Another thing is hurting $ony is that the P$2 Developers continue to support the machine bringing out more games. So in a way the machine is hurting the sales of more P$3 since you can find recent games for the machine. I think we will not see the machine to do well till the P$2 gets less games available from the new releases. But this time $ony has a more balanced video game console war. Since this is not XBOX 1.5 as they tried to said in the past and M$ surprised them with a machine that till now has better graphics, won a lot of exclusives from $ony and has better games. probably the big surprise is that the P$3 right now is a PS359. Yes a PS3 but behind the 360 so it ends with the name PS359 close to the 360.....

Comment by: Ankoku (Apr 09, 2007 21:53)

Quote:

---

probably the big surprise is that the P$3 right now is a PS359. Yes a PS3 but behind the 360 so it ends with the name PS359 close to the 360.....

---

ha ha, very clever. Actually, Xbox 360 is also having problems with presenting the best possible picture on many televisions, as referenced by several older news stories posted on this sight. The reason people feel the PS3 is losing is because the 360 has a 1 year lead, just give the "Console War" more time...Personally, I believe that there will be no clear "Winner", consumers will just go buy both, or in my case all 3 (Who can pass up Super Smash Bros. Brawl!?) so thats my take...

To Get back on the subject, I think its pretty obvious, I mean your average consumer (i.e. people who dont know what afterdawn is) are probably going after the 20GB PS3, leaving a surplus of the 60 GB consoles.

Comment by: limelight (Apr 09, 2007 22:00)

Originally posted by Auslander:

---

beat me to it, nexgen. i think maybe limelight was thinking of RAM, though.

---

Yeah i was thinking of RAM. my bad! :)

Comment by: neo1000 (Apr 09, 2007 22:00)

Obviously yoú´re not gonna see any diferences between the xbox 360 and the ps2 if you play them in a 20 inch crt tv.

Comment by: djeazyg (Apr 09, 2007 22:13)

Quote:

---

[quote]
Over 7 years later and the PS 2 is still pumping out games that are incredible and can be compared to the 360. I don’t see that ever happening again.

---

Quote:

---

The games of the PS2 can be compared to the 360 in terms that they are GAMES. Because you can't compare the graphics of the PS2 vs the 360. Also the P$3 has some of the same games that the 360 has already in their library and the P$3 is showing some lower graphics and or effects if you compare both of them (360 vs P$3). Another thing is hurting $ony is that the P$2 Developers continue to support the machine bringing out more games. So in a way the machine is hurting the sales of more P$3 since you can find recent games for the machine. I think we will not see the machine to do well till the P$2 gets less games available from the new releases. But this time $ony has a more balanced video game console war. Since this is not XBOX 1.5 as they tried to said in the past and M$ surprised them with a machine that till now has better graphics, won a lot of exclusives from $ony and has better games. probably the big surprise is that the P$3 right now is a PS359. Yes a PS3 but behind the 360 so it ends with the name PS359 close to the 360.....

---

Sorry but your little 359 thing... I think you can do better.

I said "compared to the 360". I didn’t say better. Did you play God of War 2(for example)? Just as comparable, graphics wise, with anything the 360 can do.
As for the shared games that look, just a tad, better on the 360 than the PS3... Bad comparison my friend as the 360 has over a year head start on better game development. As I understand it, games are harder to develop for the PS3 than the 360. Not a good thing but wait until they get a handle on the devolvement. Wait a year before you say the 360 is better. Oh…Wait… By then there will be a new Xbox you can spend $500 on. Like I said before…..All this happened to the PS2 right after launch. The only difference is they had no competition.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

this was SOnys 2nd big mistake (first being tryign to push a 500+ console) the 20GB version is pretty pointless ,the 60gb should have been sold below 500 everything would balance out to the same "loss" and sony would have a better rep ,Messing with BWC is another mistake sony is walking into...

---

Forgetting the fact that the PS3 has very few games right now………. You would pay $479 and get less and be happy with that? It is now a $120 difference. Sony gives a lot for $120. Free on-line being the best part. Smaller hard drive but really… What do you need with all that space? Delete some stuff once and a while and it’s not a problem.

Originally posted by neo1000:

---

Obviously yoú´re not gonna see any diferences between the xbox 360 and the ps2 if you play them in a 20 inch crt tv.

---

48 inch Samsung 1080p LCD. Ask before you make assumptions. And before you make another assumption….. I own all 3 systems. PS2, PS3 and a 360. I do know what I’m talking about.

Comment by: neo1000 (Apr 09, 2007 22:34)

Not to offend anyone, i play games on a 60 inch sony grand wega and got ps2,xbox and xbox 360 connected with component cables and ps2 games look really bad comparing to both xboxes,even the emulators on xbox look better than ps2 games and i own both god of war and Gears of War,sorry the difference is abismal.

Comment by: trainmstr (Apr 10, 2007 02:01)

ummm the big picture here ...sony had to sell a bunch of stocks to pay for their battery problem.

Now it makes sense to self-inflict to bring the stock prices down ..so people will sell them ..and sony can buy them back at a discounted rate.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 10, 2007 09:02)

Originally posted by neo1000:

---

Not to offend anyone, i play games on a 60 inch sony grand wega and got ps2,xbox and xbox 360 connected with component cables and ps2 games look really bad comparing to both xboxes,even the emulators on xbox look better than ps2 games and i own both god of war and Gears of War,sorry the difference is abismal.

---

======================================================================

......maybe because the PS2 is lesser than the Xbox,and the GC/WII is stronger than the Xbox and the 360 is stronger than them all but has fickle Hdef capabilities compared to the PS3.


I really wish the PS2 emulators got better,I prefer emulation over the real thing,more options and better control...

Comment by: ntinos (Apr 10, 2007 10:24)

I think that ps3, despite that is not cheap, is the ultimate play machine. It has wi-fi, bleutooth,even internet browser. You can chat with your friends by sending messages,speak through a microphone or watch each other by using a webcam. It has also HD and can read memory sticks as well. I think that it worthts the money and is warantied that you won 't have to bye another console for many years as there won 't be newer technology console than ps3. Inspite of xbox360, ps3 has all the necessary accesories exept HDMI and network cable. Xbox 360 needs an extra driver money to play HD which costs a lot and an extra cable to charge the controlers. So, if you think of it, the both machines costs the same.

Comment by: djeazyg (Apr 10, 2007 14:57)

Quote:

---

I prefer emulation over the real thing,more options and better control...

---

Could you please explain this to me as I have never dealt with emulation over the real thing. I got my PS3 before they decided to change over to emulation and there aren't any old Xbox games that interest me. What kind of options do you have with emulation over the real thing?

neo1000.....
The room I play in is small so I don't need anything bigger than a 48 inch. The wife would kill me if I brought all the game crap I have into the family room so I have a room all to myself.
No need to brag about how big it is. Size doesn’t really matter.
That was a bad attempt at a joke. I know.

Seriously though you are seeing what you want to see and that’s cool. As long as your happy. I'm not against the 360, I just think it could be better. I guess if it was it would be $600 as well.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 10, 2007 20:05)

djeazyg
from the haydays of 16bit emulation I hail where emulation is 99% complete

SNES,GBA,Genisis emulators have by default save state to save a game anytime anywhere and some have up to 5-7 slots you can manage multi saves in from 1 game,since the saves are by game you don't have to worry about writing over and such.

another default is graphic smoothing they can just look better than the real thing.


another default on matured emus is full button mapping and even using the mouse as a analog stick.
the more advance EMUs offer speed boosting (Gba advance has speed boost tied to a controller button so you can rush threw slow parts of a game) Zsnes has one to

Move on to the 32 bit age most have the basic options of save states and graphics enhancements PSX and n64 emulation is 80-90% complete PSX having more options and n64 begin tricky soemtiems.

There is a working Saturn emulator but someone bought it up so its hard to find.

PS2 is like 40-50% complete offers some options but sadly the console still plays better,the GC on the other hand has near perfect emulation however you need the game images witch are hell to make because of the copy protection on the GC(rippign from ethernet or a pass threw port to make image) witch is like the DC it had insane copy protection and makes it annoying to do.

The Xbox has been emulated in part but no one has got it past running demos and halo(at least none that I know).


Sicne the dawn of the PS2 and mini super computers as consoles its been harder to reverse engineer the technology and if you are to open with your protect the men in gray will sue you..


emulation has the ultimate potential even more so than newer consoles with limited vision,the WIIs Virtual console is a shadow of the options you get in a real emulator they don't offer save states or button mapping cant even use the WII mote on them this lack of foresight hurts them the most,if you want to run a game in full on elitist mode do so if you want some options at least try and offer them for games people might already have and are spending 10$ a pop to reget in a digital copy form....

Even normal gaming lacks button mapping and save "any time" states witch would be smooth out poorly deved spots in games.

Comment by: g_5tar (Apr 21, 2007 14:00)

SPAM removed