The (Current) Generation Trilogy: Wii, PS3 & XBox 360 (Console Comparison & Discussion)

No, you shouldn't always trust a biased person. However, in this case I think its not so much an anti-PS3 bias, but an anti-Sony bias (which I guess is nearly the same, but there's a difference.) It just feels (IMHO) that we're just getting shafted because of the price, and the Sony executives have made some stupid, stupid quotes that don't make me feel better about their product. Before E3, I was fully planning on buying a PS3, along with a Wii. Now... just a Wii.

For example, Sony even just announced plans that they would make more expensive versions of the PS3 (i.e. upgradable). I don't like this. At all. PCs are one thing to upgrade, but I buy a console so that I can play all games straight out-of-the-box, without having to screw around with the hardware. I already didn't like the choice by Microsoft and Sony to release two-versions of their consoles, but this makes it even worse. Lemme guess, in the next few years PS3 games will have minimum system requirements on the box?

 

Well there was that one Sony rep who said we could throw away the HP media Center PCs because the PS3 was going to render them obsolete...

"Yay! I bought a PS3 title! Oh wait, only works on some PS3's! You mean I have to upgrade my graphics chipset and get new CPU chips? Why did I throw away my PC for this?"

 

The more and more we debate and the more I think about this issue at hand...I think Nintendo has the right idea for this gen.

Sony and Microsoft are blowing my mind. I know there games look amazing. But with the high price points, and Sony calling there PS3 "a computer!?"

from IGN: Spiegel Online asked Harrison if he was concerned about the PS3 competing with the Microsoft's Xbox 360's ability to seamlessly network with PCs via Live Anywhere Harrison said, "No, this doesn't concern me and I don't think that it concerns the consumer. When you buy a game console, a primarily entertainment device, then you only want that. We believe that the PS3 will be the place where the users will play, watch movies, surf the web, and use other computer entertainment functionality. The PS3 is a computer. We don't need the PC."

An IGN article quotes: June 2, 2006 - Microsoft's Chris Lewis believes Sony has ripped off Microsoft's Xbox Live service, according to a recent interview on Eurogamer. This comes after Sony's E3 press conference, where Sony bigwigs stated their upcoming online strategy would be essential to the PS3.

It seems to me that Sony is just stealing everyone's ideas. First it took the "live" service interface and ran with that, then they annocuned the PS3 controoler will have tilt sensiblity ala Nintendo.

It seems Sony and Microsoft (especially Sony) are trying to do too much. But not little new Nintendo Wii...It's a gaming system through and through...

New revolutionary controller...check.

Great new games...check.

Virtual console to download library of games from past 20 odd years...check.

Small, compact, and beautiful...check.

Zelda...double check.

All I'm saying is Sony and Microsoft might have underestimated the power the Wii and Nintendo might wield this gen.

 

When you buy a game console, a primarily entertainment device, then you only want that. We believe that the PS3 will be the place where the users will play, watch movies, surf the web, and use other computer entertainment functionality. The PS3 is a computer. We don't need the PC. - Is it just me or is that oxymoronic? Or just MORONIC? Those two statements in bold are counterintuitive, and in the same paragraph!

Like I've always said, I want Microsoft Gaming Studios and Sony Computer Entertainment to break away from their parent companies and then we'll see hgow they do. The only reason Sony and Micrsoft stay in the market is they have the money to do it. Their gaming studios lose money, Microsoft's especially.

Not Nintendo. They are games only, and STILL manage to make profit every year.

 

O I agree quest, the only reason SCE made less of a loss is because of the huge PS2 base. They do sell more, though still not enough to keep themselves out of the red.

 

Nintendo, on the other hand- for all they're "on the way out" all the time apparently, have been in the red once (for just one quarter) in their entire public history.

Why be top if you aren't profitable?

The Playstation shareholders will want a return on their investment eventually. Sony can't go on like this much longer surely.

 

Sony vs Nintendo at E3... where's the interest?

This clip is hilarious. Sorry Sony. I especially love the Sony rep getting pissed at the end.

 

So it's not graphics, or innovation, or gameplay.
It's shareholders that make or break a system

 

I do hope you aren't talking about Sony there. Well, maybe in the graphics department.

 

The point of the article was that Sony might have an unfixable hardware problem that could reduce its claim as the most powerful.

Even if the PS3 "hard to program for" issue is resolved eventually, like with the PS2, I think the main point of the article is that the specs for the PS3 indicate it will at best be half as powerful as the 360 - assuming the information provided as evidence is accurate.


What it boils down to is that in Winter 2006/2007, if the 360 has a price drop and is $150-200 less expensive than the PS3, and can claim in commercials that it has superior hardware, isn't the PS3 going to have a much problemo?

Since nearly every game on the PS3 I'm interested in will also be on the 360, my choice would appear obvious.

 

Actually, if you read between the lines in that article, and consider the previous article I cited, maybe Sony is mentioning the possibility of upgrading the Cell processor on future versions of the console because they realize the current configuration is bottlenecked and they don't want to push back release even further to fix that problem on the chipset, so they'll sell the inferior system in year one, and release superior and fixed version in the future.

 

Nintendo only lost money in their second semi-annual in the 2004 fiscal year. Not bad. They have never lost any money in a fiscal year since 1991. Source: Bloomberg

 

>>>Actually, if you read between the lines in that article, and consider the previous article I cited, maybe Sony is mentioning the possibility of upgrading the Cell processor on future versions of the console because they realize the current configuration is bottlenecked and they don't want to push back release even further to fix that problem on the chipset, so they'll sell the inferior system in year one, and release superior and fixed version in the future. <<<

That makes more sense, actually. I really wouldn't mind that, though I'd be disappointed that the first round of units would be underpowered compared to their "second edition" younger brothers.

...Thinking about it, that's rather dangerous. I mean, we've already seen a whole lot of people claiming that they're waiting for the (hypothetical) price drop. Now, if so many people wait for the price drop that the PS3 doesn't do well, Sony could be in trouble. Add your hypothesis to the mix, and people are given incentive not to buy the first edition PS3, which could also screw the system if more people wait than buy at release.

 

The N64 had different configurations with the memory pak. The PS2 had different configurations with the Net Adaptor or not. I doubt we'd be seeing different versions of games, just some that support more features or something.

specs for the PS3 indicate it will at best be half as powerful as the 360

Actually, what I got out of it was that there was one specific thing it may not be able to do as fast as the 360. Not that the whole console was much worse.

This from a tech expert at another forum I visit:
The CPU and GPU can read and write to each other's memory massively fast, except for when the CPU wants to read from the GPU's memory. That's what takes place at 16 MBps. Which would be bad, if not for the fact there's basically no reason to do it: in the rare case that you want the GPU to send data to the CPU, then have the GPU dump it in the CPU's memory instead of its own. Problem solved.

 

I do hope you aren't talking about Sony there. Well, maybe in the graphics department.

I was making a random joke that died from scrutiny actually

 

Quick question: Out of all the games that are coming out for all 3 next gen systems which game is your most wanted.

Mine would hafta be Super Mario Galaxy or Metroid Prime 3.

 

Super Smash Bros Brawl for me.

EDIT: Oh, and Zelda too.

 

Metroid Prime 3 or Zelda: Twilight Princess.

After the amount of waiting I have had for Zelda, it better not suck or I may buy a PS3 out of spite

Funnily enough, I want Wii Sports too, so I can play a game with my fiance I know she'll enjoy and we probably won't have a large skill difference.

 

Zelda and SSBB are definetly at the top of my list.

 

I think it would be safe to say that the vast majority of the answers will be MGS4, one of the Final Fantasies (XII, XIII, plus the various re-releases and remakes), Halo 3, or a Nintendo game.

 

Mass Effect.

 

Playstation 3~~ Resistance: Fall of Man, Sonic the Hedgehog (whatever the games title is), Assasin's Creed, Warhawk, Star Wars (2007 [working title]), Heavenly Sword.

Xbox 360~~ Halo 3, Gears of War.

Nintendo Wii~~ Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, Wii Sports.

That's all I can think of for now, that I want at least.

 

More on Sony's plans to call PS3 a computer:

"Speaking about the PS3, we never said we will release a game console. It is radically different from the previous PlayStation. It is clearly a computer. Indeed, with a game console, you need to take out any unnecessary elements inside the console in order to decrease its cost. ... This will of course apply to the PS3 as well. " - Ken Kutaragi

Identity crisis, methinks.

"I think a year from the launch we could indeed extend the configuration of the PS3. Why not! Okay, this is may be joke or a personal opinion. I mean we have no such plan at this very moment. However, companies like Dell or Apple have such programs. In the PC world, specifications rarely last more than two years. You need to update them. I believe the PC is always evolving. I think that the time may come that the 60GB HDD would become too small or the RAM to low. Such issues are numerous. " - Ken Kutaragi

"It is strange to think that games are more difficult to develop with increasing processor performance. On PC, I don't find anyone complaining about improved clock, memory or HDD. On the computer named PS3, I would like the top guns of programming to express themselves. " - Ken Kutaragi

Perhaps the reason they're trying so hard to get it to be a "computer" is so that they can be taxed less in Europe. Which might actually be good for the consumer.