I think i had 10,000 games of halo 2 and 3 played online, that was at least 7 hours of gaming on 2-3 years of playing. Currently i don’t really touch my xbox nor the Ps3 but i do jump to play the drums on rock band if enough people join.
The days when i came from high school and played xbox live from 3pm-10pm pretty much everyday, made the xbox my baby, but if you are more into watching movies i would go with the Ps3.
I do think online play makes the xbox the better console, i can sit down and beat most games even under the hardest difficulties in under a week (most of the time), therefore making each game purchase a waste of cash. Online play gives you HOURS upon hours of game time that you would have not had, by playing story mode or even split screen with your friends.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I don’t care for FPS games. Never have. n fact I can’t play any game that limits my field of vision to just what I can see right in front of me.
I like the games which give you a third person POV, and don’t require you to master the 8-button movement combinations.
I’m a Splinter Cell whore. I don’t know what class of game that falls under, but I do pretty good with those types of games. [/quote]
If you like Splinter Cell, you should play the Metal Gear series.
On a somewhat related note, I just picked up a PS2 (again) and love the machine. So many great games on that system, and the best part is, you can get them all for pretty cheap. Heck, Madden 09 on PS2 is better than its PS3/360 counterparts.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I’ll tell you the limiting factor in really enjoying the games on either the PS3 or 360: the cost of the games.
Do they really need to cost $60 a pop? I’d probably buy twice as many games if they were $40 per game.
But maybe that’s just me.
[/quote]
Just rent the games you can finish in a week or two. Metal Gear Solid 4 comes to mind – great game, but you can finish it in 15-20 hours and it doesn’t have much replay value beyond that.
I couldn’t believe how much the damn PS3 controllers cost! $60?
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I’ll tell you the limiting factor in really enjoying the games on either the PS3 or 360: the cost of the games.
Do they really need to cost $60 a pop? I’d probably buy twice as many games if they were $40 per game.
But maybe that’s just me.[/quote]
I’ve had my 360 for a little over a month, and all the games I’ve bought for it have been between $10 and $35, with most of them averaging $20. Wal-Mart had some brand news ones at $18.95 (GRAW 2, Rainbox Six Vegas, Splinter Cell Double Agent); and the EB games Microplay around my town had a lot of pretty good used ones.
I just check to make sure the manual is still there and that the disk isn’t scratched. EB Games even knocked 3$ off Gotham Racing 4 (from $15 to $12) because I mentioned the manual was missing. Microplay just had a “boxing day special” on new and used games: Buy 3, pay the 2 most expensive ones. I got Gears of War 2, Halo 3 and Ninja Gaiden 2 for $105.
A well maintained “used” game plays just as well as a brand new one. The advantage is that you can get 2 or 3 for the usual $60… the downside is that you often have to wait a few months before the “hot” games become available.
[quote]En Sabah Nur wrote:
That’s also because I can’t upgrade my HDD, which the largest option is 120gb which is around $130. And to add insult to injury I can’t add my own content, only Microsoft’s. Even if I could these Blu-Ray movie rips are runnig 8GB a pop, so I’d kill the Microsoft hard drive before I got started.[/quote]
You can plug an external HDD in the USB ports and the Xbox will see it and read the contents just fine. Your music, movies, photos, etc. It’s read-only, but all your content is accessible as long as the 360 has the right codecs for it.
[quote]aznt0rk wrote:
But in a few years the developers will be able to make games that will harness the full power of the ps3, and thus will be better than the 360 hands down (graphics wise). [/quote]
I’m beginning to really doubt that. Sony has been repeating that excuse for the last 3 years and we’ve yet to see a single game that looks significantly better than the best seen on the X360.
While the Cell is undoubtedly a very powerful processor, I think the PS3 suffers from too little RAM. If you want to have more polygons, a greater number of more detailed textures, etc. you need to put them somewhere. In these days of cheap RAM and 8GB home PCS, both the X360 and the PS3 look a little silly with their 512MB…
Well I did end up going with the PS3. I purchased thinking of it more as an overall media center than just for games. My gaming time is very limited (maybe 2 hours a night if I’m lucky during the week and not much on the weekends as I’m with my GF, and unfortunately she doesn’t like video games).
I must say blu ray is really fucking amazing! I don’t even want to go to theatres now, I wish they would just release shit on blu ray the same day as its out in theatre so I can go rent the movie and watch it in my room on the HDTV. Picture looks better and its more comfortable laying on my bed than sittin in chairs listening to babies cry because some stupid bitch mom thought it was a good idea to bring her 2 yr. old to the movies.
So far I only have 2 games, fallout 3 and oblivion (with both expansions included). Both games are great so far, Fallout 3 is the newer and obviously looks better on the screen than Oblivion but I’m enjoying both. I’d love to pick up Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and a few other games but it’ll have to wait till next pay period. I’ve spent enough in the last 2 weeks (bought the HDTV, PS3, 2 games, new sony receiver so I could hook up my surround sound, etc).
Sorry to say this guys, but my parents gave me a WII for Christmas, and it’s freaking awesome. I didn’t think I’d like it at all, but it really is fun.
I really figured it would kinda be a novelty experience, but the gameplay is better than any other system I’ve ever played on.
If you don’t give a crap about graphics it’s well worth the 250 dollar price tag.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Sorry to say this guys, but my parents gave me a WII for Christmas, and it’s freaking awesome. I didn’t think I’d like it at all, but it really is fun.
I really figured it would kinda be a novelty experience, but the gameplay is better than any other system I’ve ever played on.
If you don’t give a crap about graphics it’s well worth the 250 dollar price tag.
Flame away.[/quote]
No flames here. Wii is awesome and the fun-factor for its best games is a lot higher than the other consoles.
The only reason I got a PS3 instead of a wii is the volume of decent titles coming out for the PS when compared to the wii. If you look on IGN, wii has games from 2006 still in its top 10 list. All it’s got is zelda, mario, and… well… that’s about it.
At least with the PS you know good games are always on the way.
[quote]josh86 wrote:
So far I only have 2 games, fallout 3 and oblivion (with both expansions included). Both games are great so far, Fallout 3 is the newer and obviously looks better on the screen than Oblivion but I’m enjoying both. I’d love to pick up Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and a few other games but it’ll have to wait till next pay period. I’ve spent enough in the last 2 weeks (bought the HDTV, PS3, 2 games, new sony receiver so I could hook up my surround sound, etc).[/quote]
I just went through Assassin’s Creed last week and that game rocks. At first, I didn’t like the combat, felt it was too simplistic; but once you get all the various moves and try using only your “secret blade” ('cause that’s what bad-ass assassins do, okay?) it’s great fun. I also give props to Ubisoft for trying something different than the usual “Hit high” “hit low” “kick” combat that most games have. Instead of having to madly press in long combos; AC’s combat is all about precise timing.
Graphics are amazing - going to Acre (one of the cities) and getting all the way up on the cross of the cathedral gives you an incredible view.
[quote]pookie wrote:
josh86 wrote:
So far I only have 2 games, fallout 3 and oblivion (with both expansions included). Both games are great so far, Fallout 3 is the newer and obviously looks better on the screen than Oblivion but I’m enjoying both. I’d love to pick up Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and a few other games but it’ll have to wait till next pay period. I’ve spent enough in the last 2 weeks (bought the HDTV, PS3, 2 games, new sony receiver so I could hook up my surround sound, etc).
I just went through Assassin’s Creed last week and that game rocks. At first, I didn’t like the combat, felt it was too simplistic; but once you get all the various moves and try using only your “secret blade” ('cause that’s what bad-ass assassins do, okay?) it’s great fun. I also give props to Ubisoft for trying something different than the usual “Hit high” “hit low” “kick” combat that most games have. Instead of having to madly press in long combos; AC’s combat is all about precise timing.
Graphics are amazing - going to Acre (one of the cities) and getting all the way up on the cross of the cathedral gives you an incredible view.
[/quote]
Agreed. That game has “make a movie off this” written all over it.
…which I guess also means a movie that sucks will be made shortly.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
pookie wrote:
josh86 wrote:
So far I only have 2 games, fallout 3 and oblivion (with both expansions included). Both games are great so far, Fallout 3 is the newer and obviously looks better on the screen than Oblivion but I’m enjoying both. I’d love to pick up Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and a few other games but it’ll have to wait till next pay period. I’ve spent enough in the last 2 weeks (bought the HDTV, PS3, 2 games, new sony receiver so I could hook up my surround sound, etc).
I just went through Assassin’s Creed last week and that game rocks. At first, I didn’t like the combat, felt it was too simplistic; but once you get all the various moves and try using only your “secret blade” ('cause that’s what bad-ass assassins do, okay?) it’s great fun. I also give props to Ubisoft for trying something different than the usual “Hit high” “hit low” “kick” combat that most games have. Instead of having to madly press in long combos; AC’s combat is all about precise timing.
Graphics are amazing - going to Acre (one of the cities) and getting all the way up on the cross of the cathedral gives you an incredible view.
Agreed. That game has “make a movie off this” written all over it.
…which I guess also means a movie that sucks will be made shortly.[/quote]
[quote]Professor X wrote:
pookie wrote:
josh86 wrote:
So far I only have 2 games, fallout 3 and oblivion (with both expansions included). Both games are great so far, Fallout 3 is the newer and obviously looks better on the screen than Oblivion but I’m enjoying both. I’d love to pick up Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and a few other games but it’ll have to wait till next pay period. I’ve spent enough in the last 2 weeks (bought the HDTV, PS3, 2 games, new sony receiver so I could hook up my surround sound, etc).
I just went through Assassin’s Creed last week and that game rocks. At first, I didn’t like the combat, felt it was too simplistic; but once you get all the various moves and try using only your “secret blade” ('cause that’s what bad-ass assassins do, okay?) it’s great fun. I also give props to Ubisoft for trying something different than the usual “Hit high” “hit low” “kick” combat that most games have. Instead of having to madly press in long combos; AC’s combat is all about precise timing.
Graphics are amazing - going to Acre (one of the cities) and getting all the way up on the cross of the cathedral gives you an incredible view.
Agreed. That game has “make a movie off this” written all over it.
…which I guess also means a movie that sucks will be made shortly.[/quote]
Thinking Assassin’s Creed will definitely be my next game purchase. And it can be had for under $30 most places I’ve checked now.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
I never did get into the new systems much. Maybe NHL or Madden periodically during PS2, but I’ll take an NES or SNES system any day over any new stuff[/quote]
Yeah, I personally still have my 13" black and white tv that I got when I was 8 years old. Screw this new fangled technology with your “flat screens” and your “why phy” and your “blue rays”. If I want to see a movie, I just pop in a fresh VHS tape and turn up the volume on a brand new Charlie’s Angels episode…or CHiPs.
Dumbass teenagers with your hair and your celly phones.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
jehovasfitness wrote:
I never did get into the new systems much. Maybe NHL or Madden periodically during PS2, but I’ll take an NES or SNES system any day over any new stuff
Yeah, I personally still have my 13" black and white tv that I got when I was 8 years old. Screw this new fangled technology with your “flat screens” and your “why phy” and your “blue rays”. If I want to see a movie, I just pop in a fresh VHS tape and turn up the volume on a brand new Charlie’s Angels episode…or CHiPs.
Dumbass teenagers with your hair and your celly phones.[/quote]
Hahaha, man jfit I dunno. The picture quality of a new console on an HDTV is amazing. I love good graphics, I can’t play a game with shitty graphics and the better they are the more I love it. The picture I get on my HDTV with my PS3 is seriously amazing, I absolutely love it! Everything is just so sharp, crisp, clear, beautiful!
I’m not worried about picture quality gaming. I for one don’t like 3-D gameworlds, even when N64 had it.
It could be because I suck with directions, lol. But, anyways, I just think the older stuff is more fun, except for the sports games like I mentioned. The old stuff isn’t better in that regard. I even like the older racing games better (Top Gear, F-Zero, Mario Kart) over GTstuff.
Agreed. That game has “make a movie off this” written all over it.
…which I guess also means a movie that sucks will be made shortly.[/quote]
The game is inspired by historical events, and that got me reading about the 3rd Crusade, the Hashashins and the various factions that were around, all vying for power and control of Jerusalem. I think they could make a pretty interesting movie if they just stick to the historical facts; except for having a “super assassin” character that the viewers can identify with.
I liked that in the game, every time you kill a “boss”, you get a dialog with him, and that their motivations never were as clear-cut as previously claimed by your boss or by other informants. I’m not sure how they could translate that to film (unless they keep the “you are exploring your ancestor’s DNA memories” theme from the game), but that’s exactly the kind of scene that makes for interesting and complex characters.
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Especially if Uwe Boll makes it…[/quote]
Argh! No!
What I don’t understand is that there was a Bloodrayne II made… and that Alone in the Dark II is currently being worked on. How many flops are required before they learn? Why in hell is anyone still letting that guy make movies based on their stuff?
I really liked Assassin’s Creed, but that game is so damn repetitive. You save the same people, they all say the same thing after, etc. etc.
I can’t wait to see what they do with part II, it has so much potential.
I have a 360 and really enjoy it, but I’ll probably end up getting a PS3 next Xmas. Mostly for the blu-ray player and the occasional PS3 exclusive that looks good.