PS3 not so expensive for what you get?

[Revolution911]

Originally posted by DragonBlaze

quote:

Originally posted by Revolution911 quote: Originally posted by DragonBlaze quote: Originally posted by Revolution911 Nintendo Wii is better. All of you just got your pride kicked in the nuts. Better in what sence? If you're talking about the price, then yes, the wii has a better price. If you talk about any other aspect of it, the ps3 is 'better' :p In the aspect of fun. The ENTIRE BASIS OF EVERY GAME EVER MADE. Fun. **** graphics. And I didnt even know what the hell blu ray was before E3. Nintendo always has some awesome innovation (controller) to make every game they make 10000000000 times more fun.

So the wii IS more fun than the ps3? How so? Games make a system fun, not the system itself. And what you find fun, is an opinion, not a fact. I think a lot of the games the ps3 will have will be much funner than the games the wii will have. The motion sensor crap idea is a bad idea. Its not bad to incorperate into a controller, but if you try to base a controller off of that, bad. Its not practical, and it will NOT work in most scenarios. Example, you like a sword fighting game, too bad, you cant use the wii motion sensor for that. It'll work in some games like a baseball game.

You're opinion on the wii being better because its funner is completely biast. There isn't even any games made for it, you've never played it, how can you determain that its going to be funner already?

 

quote:

"any other"? Fanboy.

I'm not a fanboy. If I was a playstation fanboy, I'd think the psp is better than the ds, but I don't. When I look at a system, I look at all the pros and cons of it, what the actual system has and what it doesn't have. The PS3 simply won that by a landslide  

YOU sir, are wrong.  :vict:

The only thing I see good about playstation is RPG's. And you can use a normal controllor if you dont like the wii one. The control opens an entire army of new gaming possibilities. Its pretty much impossible to not have atleast one of them be really fun.



AND YOU KNOW WHAT. I NEVER REALLY LIKED MGS THAT MUCH. I SAID IT. *Hides behind a rock*

[GaryCXJk]

Okay, first of all, it's way too early to throw this "Nintendo has more fun" crap now. Who says that? Says the demos? Says the people who played it? Says the Wiimote?

I don't think so. Although I know Nintendo won't disappoint me, it is possible that Nintendo still screws up the games because of the gimmick-feel.

Sony's PS3 doesn't have this, at least not as much. They don't focus on the motion sensoring and EyeToy. It's still all about the games themselves. You still play them with your normal controller. With the Wii, you also can still play them with basically a GCN controller, but it's still all about the Wiimote.

I mean, how many DS games actually intergrated the touch screen without it making it feel like a gimmick? I bet you wouldn't name more than ten, or at least within a quarter of an hour without the use of the internet. I know I can't.

And sure, the DS was tonnes of fun, but didn't the PSP also have games with tonnes of fun? Are we ignoring that fact?

So yes, I do have the right here to call people here fanboys, simply because they jump to the conclusion. I myself am not certain of the PS3's future, but I do know that in the end it turns out allright. At least not as exhaggerated as most people think.

[Revolution911]

Rofl....Wiimote...

I've actually never had a Nintendo product aside from a Gameboy. But I always kick myself in the head for buying a PSP instead of a DS. Same with PS2 and Gamecube. Honestly, I've never played a good game on my PSP besides Monster Hunter Freedom =/. I'm getting a Wii but square-enix will probably force me to save up for a ps3 afterwards. I still think Blu Ray sucks though.

[DragonBlaze]

Originally posted by DarkFlood2

quote:

Originally posted by Apex Because believe me, you aren't truly having fun till you look like a retard doing it.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

And to all of you naysayers to the Wiimote, how can you honestly say "It won't work" or "It's a failure". Have YOU actually tried it? The answer here is "no". Until you have actually USED the Wiimote and can make an honest, judgemental opinion about it, all you are saying is one-sided fanboyism (against the Wii).

I don't need to use the wiimote to know it won't work. Here, think about this. You're playing zelda, and you use the wiimote like a sword. You attack an anemy, the enemy blocks. Well now what, since the controller can't emulate any resistance, the wiimote possition would be where the attack would have been, but the in game sword would be halted where it was blocked. IT WON'T WORK, plain and simple.

Sure, the wii has the other controller, but then all you have is a system just like the other two, but with crappier specs. No, crappier specs don't ruin a game, but they don't help either. All the wii has that I like somewhat is zelda, and even that is repetetive cliche plotline.



 

YOU sir, are wrong.

The only thing I see good about playstation is RPG's. And you can use a normal controllor if you dont like the wii one. The control opens an entire army of new gaming possibilities. Its pretty much impossible to not have atleast one of them be really fun.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT. I NEVER REALLY LIKED MGS THAT MUCH. I SAID IT. *Hides behind a rock*

In what aspect was I wrong? The ps3 has more than just rpgs, in either case, rpgs are my favorite type of game, and thus I think they're the funnest overall. The actual system of the wii isn't better than the ps3. Look at the specs. Sure, specs don't make a game, but they don't condemn them either. There isn't any part of the wii system that is 'better' than the ps3 except how much it costs. But you do have to realize that the 600 price tag won't be there forever.

Its kinda funny, I keep hearing people don't like the ps3 because they don't like sony for something they said or something they did, but nothing about the actual system other than it has better specs and a higher cost  :p

[DarkFlood2]

Sure the Wiimote might be a little gimmiky, but look how pooerly the PS2 does with FPS games (I own quite a few so I know). With the Wiimote you can physically aim as if you were actually holding the gun itself.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5481335368476915030&q=red+steel

This could single-handedly push nintendo back into the fps market.

As far as I know, the PS2 is only good for RPGs where the glamour of having better graphics is actually worthwhile.

And in the Zelda game for the Wii/Gamecube, the Wiimote (for the Wii version obviously) is ONLY used for targeting. Sorta like the "z-targeting" for the 64 games.

[DragonBlaze]

I had nothing against FPS games for the playstation.

Anyway, if they made a wiimote in the shape of a gun, that'd be cool for fps games, but I'd find it annoying to point the actual remote, a remote isnt really the best way to aim something.

And yes, the majority of the good games on the ps3 are rpg games. But it was really the only system that had any good ones. Theres zelda, but thats more of an andventure game. There was morrowind and fable, but those too are more of adventure games, plus they're avalible for the computer as well.

There are many other good games for the playstation that aren't rpgs. Tekken games for example, grand turismo, grand theft auto, MGS, etc.

[aboutasoandthis]

 Originally Posted by DragonBlaze
 

I don't need to use the wiimote to know it won't work. Here, think about this. You're playing zelda, and you use the wiimote like a sword. You attack an anemy, the enemy blocks. Well now what, since the controller can't emulate any resistance, the wiimote possition would be where the attack would have been, but the in game sword would be halted where it was blocked. IT WON'T WORK, plain and simple.

It's a little off topic, but the Wiimote is actually used for a spin attack. You actually SPIN AROUND YOURSELF and you do Link's special move. You still just press the A button to attack. Like DarkFlood2 said, you use it with bow and arrows.

I still didn't get my question answered. What is the hard drive for? Is is like a memory card? Does it store music and movies? Is is for internet access? I really don't need all that stuff.

[DarkFlood2]

Someone end this thread. NOW. This thread is going nowhere, once 2007 rolls around and all of the systems have been released, then this thread will be viable.

[DragonBlaze]

Wait, so you press the A button to attack, but if you want to do a spin again, you actually have to spin around? Using the wiimote for some skills but the regular buttons for others is kind of queer.

 

I still didn't get my question answered. What is the hard drive for? Is is like a memory card? Does it store music and movies? Is is for internet access? I really don't need all that stuff.

The hard drive is for storing save files mainly. Thus you won't need expensive memory cards. Think about it, for the price of a 1 gb flash drive, you can probably buy a big hard drive. Memory cards are more expensive than hard drives becuase they're more compact and stuff. If you were just going to use one memory card, it would probably be cheaper than the hard drive. But if you need multiple ones, the hard drive will save money, you don't have to worry about losing the cards, and it holds a lot more.

EDIT: This topic was originally about that the ps3 isn't that expensive for what you get. A blue ray player is $1000, the ps3 is $600, and you get the blue ray player, a hard drive, and a top notch gaming system. Then people started dissing the ps3 for other reasons, and now we're here :p

[aboutasoandthis]

Nintendo wants pepole to excersize. I'll just get my little brother to spin.

Back on the real topic, now that there is a smaller PS3, it doesn't seem expensive for what you get at all. You get awesome games if you're comforable just playing normal games, you have a great library of games, and a hard drive. I hope this blue ray player will let developers make better looking games.

Thanks for the answer.

[Tomi]

First purpose of thread: Yes, it is a great deal, but I don't need bluray.
Second nonpurpose of thread: Screw all the third gen consoles, I'm getting me some spore.

[Apex]

That statement is laughable DB... So you don't have to spend alot of money on Expensive Memory cards, HAH, instead you pay an extra one hundred dollars for an extra 40gigs.

Not expensive my ***...

You do know how much save files take, don't you?

The playstation memory card was 30kb if I am not mistaken, and the playstation 2 was 8mb.

You don't need 60gb for saving... It's for game updates. Wii is doing it to, for games like Mario kart (Additional Tracks and Items) and games like Super Smash Bros. Brawl (Additional Levels, items  and characters.)

If sony wanted to, they could get rid of the stupid 20 and 60 gig hardrives, and make them much smaller, but they make more money for jacking up the storage and jacking up the price, it's all about the larger numbers.

The Wii will have 512mb internal memmory for updates and saves, and I doubt it will need much more, even though they are going to have a port for upgrading it.. (aka an additional memory card.)

Sony thinks they can win, soley with larger numbers. That's it. That's all they have going for them. GTA isn't even showing them as much respect anymore, they are releasing for 360 initially as well now.

 :taunt: Haha, at Sony Fan-boys.  :taunt:

[DragonBlaze]

Originally posted by Apex
That statement is laughable DB... So you don't have to spend alot of money on Expensive Memory cards, HAH, instead you pay an extra one hundred dollars for an extra 40gigs.

Not expensive my ***...

You do know how much save files take, don't you?

The playstation memory card was 30kb if I am not mistaken, and the playstation 2 was 8mb.

You don't need 60gb for saving... It's for game updates. Wii is doing it to, for games like Mario kart (Additional Tracks and Items) and games like Super Smash Bros. Brawl (Additional Levels, items  and characters.)

If sony wanted to, they could get rid of the stupid 20 and 60 gig hardrives, and make them much smaller, but they make more money for jacking up the storage and jacking up the price, it's all about the larger numbers.

The Wii will have 512mb internal memmory for updates and saves, and I doubt it will need much more, even though they are going to have a port for upgrading it.. (aka an additional memory card.)

Sony thinks they can win, soley with larger numbers. That's it. That's all they have going for them. GTA isn't even showing them as much respect anymore, they are releasing for 360 initially as well now.

 :taunt: Haha, at Sony Fan-boys.  :taunt:

You do realize that a new memory card costs $50 right? Two memory cards =  cost1 hard drive. And if you're smart like me, you wouldn't spend all the money for the large hard drive, you'd buy the cheaper version with the smaller one.

So because sony makes a system with better specs than the little wii, it sucks? You're a biast wii fanboy. Now i laught at you.

Originally posted by Tomi
First purpose of thread: Yes, it is a great deal, but I don't need bluray.
Second nonpurpose of thread: Screw all the third gen consoles, I'm getting me some spore.

Ah yes spore, that looks like a great game. Hopefully the creature generator will be able to generate creatures that I like

If you think about it though. The cost of a computer needed to play new games is more than any gaming counsil will cost new.

[Tomi]

Originally posted by DragonBlaze

Ah yes spore, that looks like a great game. Hopefully the creature generator will be able to generate creatures that I like

If you think about it though. The cost of a computer needed to play new games is more than any gaming counsil will cost new.

But I already have a computer.... :p  And I need a new video card anyway...

[Apex]

What memory card costs $50!?!?!?