[quote]pookie wrote:
gsxtacy wrote:
I 100% agree with the lack of games. Im not a fanboy by an means , i have a few friends with 360 and have enjoyed many games on the system (gears, crackdown and i look forward to bioshock and mass effect…i may even pick one up for those games.
Games keep coming out much more often for the X360 than they do for the PS3. The PS3 has been out for close to 8 months now and games are few and far between. The PS3 is also losing many of its exclusive titles. That situation needs to reverse itself if the PS3 wants to remain competitive.
If Microsoft fix their reliability problems and drops the price, choosing a console is going to become a no-brainer.
200$ for a reliable, quiet console, with a large game library, tons of upcoming games and more than double the number of exclusive titles is going to be very hard to match with an overpriced BluRay player who has a few good games available.
Sony needs to capitalize on gamers like myself, who are eager to get a next-gen console, but are still waiting to see which one “wins” this generation. They need to convince me that I should forget about the X360 and get the PS3.
I don’t care about HDDVD or BluRay, so they need to show me games that I simply can’t pass up. They are lucky that Microsoft still has an overpriced, crappy product (in my opinion) to compete with them. As CPU and GPU die sizes shrink, costs will come down and reliability will increase.
If Microsoft fixes those issues before Christmas and combines that with Halo 3 and a price drop (or some kind of promotional bundle) it’s going to be very hard to justify spending twice as much or more simply because the PS3 has potential.
Your also right in gears looking better than resistance, gears is incredible, but it was released after a good year in the 360s lifestyle, resistance was a launch game. Just give it some time.
Still, the development kits went out at about the same time for both consoles, so developers had similar time to work on titles for each.
Sony can only push that excuse so far… If, come Christmas, they don’t have a really incredibly standout game, what will they say? The X360 has 2nd year games and we only are on our 1st year?
At some point, Sony needs to knock our socks off with a game that cannot be match graphically by anything, console or PC. They kept calling the Cell a “supercomputer” and even at one point suggesting that the PS3 wouldn’t even need a GPU because the Cell was so awesome… it’s more than time to deliver on that promise.
Sony took an entire year more before releasing, and yet they have nothing to show for it. The PS3 was unfinished (as their frequent firmware upgrades can attest too) and none of the games really stood out as “special.” The online service repeated all the mistakes the X360 made, even thought these had been well publicized (background downloading being the worst one.)
Even now, very few of the announced games for the PS3 really make me want to buy one.
Gears was also quite linear and the 40 person online multiplayer on resistance is quite impressive. Check out drakes fortune though, truely a testament to what this gen will be like.
Most FPS are rather linear during single player. Halo, Black, Doom 3, Rogue Trooper (not a FPS, but similar to GoW in mechanics)… I don’t really mind a linear story if it’s good. And my best experiences on Xbox live have been with relatively small groups. I’m not sure that “more is better” where online play is concerned. Of course, having the choice of it is nice.
As for halo, i really think bungie dropped the ball graphically on that one. It doesnt matter though, halo has such a following that itll still sell
Well Halo 3 is not out yet. Most games have less polish during the multiplayer portions, where other concerns, such as network response and reducing lag take precedence over eye candy.
If Bungie had shown their best effort graphics for the beta, and came up short, it could have killed some of the hype for the release of the full game. A better strategy, in my opinion, is to beta with just adequate graphics and then release with the full-fledged eye candy. You can then get reviews that say “forget the beta, Halo 3 is fantastically gorgeous” and such, instead of “if you’ve seen the beta, you’ve seen it all…”
I don’t really know either way, but seeing as Halo 1 was still one of the best looking Xbox games 6 years after it’s November 2001 release, I’d bet that Bungie can do much better with the X360 than what I’ve seen of the beta.
Microsoft is entirely aware of the impact of that game and they simply cannot afford to foul it up. The only valid criticism must be that the graphics are familiar… which is expected, since this is the 3rd title of the series. The Warthog should still look like a Warthog, the Banshees like Banshees and the Forerunner structures should still be massive steel, concrete and ceramic building.
[/quote]
I agree on most of your points, except the dev kit one. Sony got their dev kits out VEry late and are just recently sharing tools with 3rd pqrties to help them code for the ps3. It is sonys fault, no one elses. Hopefully after E3 in july, we will see how the 360 and the ps3 stack up.
But fuck your right, i need some games, ive found myself searching for old ps2 games lately. It quite depressing,