Weekly Poll 4/8/07

[Tondog]

AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE 1080p or GIVE A SHIT ABOUT BLUE RAY, YOU ARE PAYING FOR TECHNOLOGY YOU'LL NEVER USE OR GET THE MOST OUT OF!!!

Holy crap, settle down man. All of PS3's games use Blu Ray, and even Resistance, a launch game, is using about 18 gb of space on the disc, which would be the equivalent of 2 dual layer dvd discs. As PS3 games get more detailed, they will end up taking up more space: up to 50 gb on a dual layer blu ray disc.

IF YOU HAVE SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS TO PISS AWAY, BE MY GUEST!!!

Ok, I will certainly do so. If you have four hundred dollars to piss away and then get nickeled and dimed by Microsoft on online service and all their little addons, please feel free to go ahead and do that.

I stand by my price point. TO ME, it's not worth paying more than $200 for the console.

Why 200? It's certainly has more stuff packed in there to make it worth at least double that price.

But back to the question at hand: I voted God Of War 3, but that's only because that's my most anticipated PS3 game on the list. Ratchet and Clank Future and Little Big Planet have convinced me to get the console soon.

[Barracuda]

None of the above games would make me want to buy a PS3. Of the above games the only series I have played is Final Fantasy and I wasn't impressed with the game  I played. That and the fact that the controller is the worst I have ever used doesn't help sell the system much.

[Tynstar]

I voted None of the above.

@Tondog - You only get nickeled and dimed to death if you choose to. I pay my fee for Xbox Live and thats it. I have never bought anything else on XBL. I did get a 1600 point card for 5 bucks when I bought PSU but I have yet to use that and that was 6 months ago.

[phoenix1967]

God, you people are fucking picky!

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

What game scoop?

IT'S SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS BEFORE YOU EVEN BUY 1 GAME!!!

AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE 1080p or GIVE A SHIT ABOUT BLUE RAY, YOU ARE PAYING FOR TECHNOLOGY YOU'LL NEVER USE OR GET THE MOST OUT OF!!!

IF YOU HAVE SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS TO PISS AWAY, BE MY GUEST!!!

I stand by my price point. TO ME, it's not worth paying more than $200 for the console. And all of the games mentioned in the survey I couldn't care less about (aside from God of War).

So you admit you're a Microsoft fanboy and spent more money on a 360 then you would spend on a PS3?

That's my point.

IF Sony would've charged $400 or less for the console and IF they would have ANY games that I'd be interested in playing, then MAYBE I would've waited for a PS3 instead of getting a 360. However, that didn't happen!

So yes, I've spent more on the 360 than I would spend on a PS3. But like I've said many times before, I OWN A PS2! It has some exclusives that I enjoy and cannot get anywhere else. And neither of these statements may me a "fanboy" of any system.

But $600 before you can even play a single game is just ridiculous...for ANY console! And I'm not alone, if you checked our "PS3: What Price Would You Pay?" poll, over 50% voted they'd pay $199 or less for the system.

[Ando]

so, uh, who else voted Kingdom Hearts 3?

[Tynstar]

phoenix1967 is a fanboy

[Fuyukaze]

God, you people are fucking picky!

It's my money, your damn right I'm fucking picky.

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

What game scoop?

Much like above, only I bought the cheaper model that had more games I cared to enjoy for it.  You know, the system every "hard core" gamer loves to trash these days.  The Fischer Price Wii system.  Frankly I'm loving it.

I'd like something from the system to wow me in a way I've never been moved before.  So far none of the games listed come close to doing just that.  It has to wow me enough to spend almost 2 months pay.  That doesnt leave much chance for them to ever do it, but that's my choice.  If one of you want to buy me a new ps3, or hell, meet me half way and cover half of it then we are talking.

[Tan]

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

I can't speak for anyone else here but for me it's a matter of content. If the PS3 had a pile of awesome games I badly wanted I'd get one in a sec even at $600. Right now there's absolutely nothing on the horizon that interests me, therefore it's just a $600 "Resistance player". Take away multi-console releases it's slim picking for the enormous price you pay.

Check back in a year or two maybe people's opinion of the PS3 will be signifigantly improved when it has a library of games to justify it's price, or actually proves it's claims of superiority. 

[Shimra]

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

What game scoop?

Nothing is wierd about it. You could simply realize that the 360 has more exclusives for it than the PS3 and the PS3 exclusives are dwindling. Hell, DMC4 is coming out for the 360 now so I have no idea why that is on the list. Furthermore, MGS4 is likely to come to the 360 much like MGS2 went to the Xbox and if you don't believe the Konami support for the 360 explain why they allowed SotN for download. Then you are stuck with two square-enix RPGs which while good don't really merrit owning the system and a potential God of War III even though Devil May Cry 3 SE blows God of War 1 and 2 clear out of the water so we can assume the same will occur with DMC4.

And then of course the Wii has so many exclusives and great things going for it I shouldn't need to explain.


Soooo.... In short, nothing is wrong with us who decided not to get a PS3 whatsoever.

[phoenix1967]

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

I can't speak for anyone else here but for me it's a matter of content. If the PS3 had a pile of awesome games I badly wanted I'd get one in a sec even at $600. Right now there's absolutely nothing on the horizon that interests me, therefore it's just a $600 "Resistance player". Take away multi-console releases it's slim picking for the enormous price you pay.

Check back in a year or two maybe people's opinion of the PS3 will be signifigantly improved when it has a library of games to justify it's price, or actually proves it's claims of superiority. 

I agree that it's going to take time for PS3 to get a built up library of exclusives. But even then, in my opinion no console is ever going to be worth my paying $600 for it. And with the rumor that the PS3 wont get its first drop in price until at least 2009, I'm definitely not going to hold my breath.

[Shimra]

Also note that I would love to play FFXIII, KH3 and DQ9. Oh wait...

[Tondog]

IF Sony would've charged $400 or less for the console and IF they would have ANY games that I'd be interested in playing, then MAYBE I would've waited for a PS3 instead of getting a 360. However, that didn't happen!

So you want Sony to charge $50 less than a Wii for their PS3? If Sony did that with all the hardware they have packed in there, they would have been out major money. Yet, you're perfectly fine with paying $200 more than what you say PS3 should be for a 360. Shows where your interests lie...

But $600 before you can even play a single game is just ridiculous...for ANY console! And I'm not alone, if you checked our "PS3: What Price Would You Pay?" poll, over 50% voted they'd pay $199 or less for the system.

I wonder how many of those votes were just out of utter hatred for PS3.

They're fucking weird, paying $400 for an inferior system but not batting an eye at the Godlike sexiness of the PS3 unless it gets stupidly cheap.

What game scoop?

Much like above, only I bought the cheaper model that had more games I cared to enjoy for it.  You know, the system every "hard core" gamer loves to trash these days.  The Fischer Price Wii system.  Frankly I'm loving it.

As did I. I just wish more games would come out for it sometime soon. However, Super Paper Mario kicks all kinds of ass.

Furthermore, MGS4 is likely to come to the 360 much like MGS2 went to the Xbox

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Hideo Kojima himself says that MGS4 will not come to 360...

http://kotaku.com/gaming/...h-hideo-kojima-248695.php

Moving on, I remind him of a comment he made last year comparing each of the three current consoles to "different kinds of dinner". Did he still think that was the case, now that all three are on the market? Nope. "They're more like a movie theatre metaphor", he says.

"The PS3 is like the theatre, it's a little bit high-priced but it has to be high quality as well. The 360 is a DVD, it still needs to be high quality but you need more variations, while the Wii is almost like a TV channel, because every game you have it with your family".

....

"But like I said, MGS4 is aimed for the movie theatre, it's aimed for the PS3, so the game's scenario and graphics need this theatre-type hardware. It's when a producer has a game that can work on the 'DVD level' that a game will go multiplatform", he says. Sorry kids. Your "OMGMGS4360" banners will have to come out another day.

Since we've opened up this can of worms, I may as well get his thoughts on it. Why, I ask, do you think this rumour simply refuses to go away? "Because 360 owners want it on 360, obviously", he quips.

There you have it! Right from Mr. Kojima himself. His game is just not intended for 360, and the rumors will never go away becasue 360 owners just want it on their console.

Don't think he's against the 360 either, by the way. He's admitted several times that he likes Gears of War.

[Tynstar]

Does Kojima have the final say or does Konami? If it is Konami money talks.

@Leon - I hate Sony not the PS3.... If it was 400 like the 360 i would consider getting a PS3. I wont spend 600 on ANY system. I dont care who makes it.

[phoenix1967]

IF Sony would've charged $400 or less for the console and IF they would have ANY games that I'd be interested in playing, then MAYBE I would've waited for a PS3 instead of getting a 360. However, that didn't happen!

So you want Sony to charge $50 less than a Wii for their PS3? If Sony did that with all the hardware they have packed in there, they would have been out major money. Yet, you're perfectly fine with paying $200 more than what you say PS3 should be for a 360. Shows where your interests lie...

I guess I wasn't clear. Never did I say that I expected Sony to charge $50 less for a PS3 than Nintendo charges for a Wii. What I meant is that when the price of the PS3 drops down to under $200, THEN I'd consider buying one. As of now, the price is what it is ($600). And judging by the $600 price, I'm saying I'm not paying it.

And yes, I bought my 360 a year ago for the $400 price. Which is my maximum price point for a console, btw. However, the cost wasn't really incurred by me since I got it with casino winnings.  

And yes, the 360 has more games that interest me; both now and in upcoming releases (Bioshock, Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, Blue Dragon, Halo 2, etc). Which is not to say that by the time the PS3 drops down to under $200, that they won't; I'm just saying that I'm not interested in their lineup as of now.

[Tan]

No one here hates the PS3. The sad fact is that as consumers Sony just isn't giving value for the money spent simple as that. Setting aside their filthy arrogance and marketing ploys they are on a fast track to becoming the next 3DO.

If anything they've alienated every one of us who have libraries of PS1/PS2 games. And just about every person who has responded to in the past or even in this thread to any negative Sony threads owns a PS1/PS2 or both. If we were "haters" or "fanboys" we certainly wouldn't own them.

The latest offering Sony has brought to those who have bought their games/systems for the last 13 years has turned to bitterness for some, disappointment for others.