Last-Gen Console Discussions (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii)

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
iif you're a chef, and you have to make chilli, the 360 chef would go out an buy chunky's chilli, its easy, no worries, while the ps3 chef would have to man up, simmer that shit out til its fine and dandy, but you know what, the end result is damn tasty

No, see, if this was true, Sony's plan would have worked.

But it isn't. If you are claiming that PS3 games are demonstably superior to 360 games, you can hold that opinion all you want but it is not the general opinion of the industry. This was the whole point- the PS3, for all its extra complexity, is not actually producting, in any demonstrable way, significantly better results. The effort isn't worth it! Hence the cell issue IS still an issue- and it is particularly breahtaking to see people trying to claim that it is not an issue because games on the PS3 are now looking the same as on 360. The SAME? Are you frigging kidding me? The whole argument is that the cell is meant to make them run much better! Again, this is an argument of moving the goalposts- poor.

And as I said before, that PS3 architecture will still work a few years down the line is worth nothing when the 720 comes out- and you can say it is a bad idea all you like and that it will annoy current owners. Irrelevant- it will still do the job, and that kicks out the support of the 'futre-proof' argument.

Like I say, Sony isn't going to make this mistake again with the PS3, making a huge, inflated supersystem designed to last for so long. it has clearly lost out compared to simpler, short-term efforts, and only Sony's massive name brand, other support from its company tech base and- most crucially- the blu-ray issue has put the PS3 where it is- last place, though still in the game.

None of this makes the PS3 rubbish, its games rubbish, or people who enjoy tt silly. Nor does it detract from 360's reliability issues. But it's still foolish to ignore the handicaps its base architecture has caused, foolish to make it that the problems are on the same scale as the reliability ones when the market situation clearly shows that is not so- and exceptionally foolish to blame the programmers. It is the hardware manufacturer's job to produce stuff that programmers want to use, not the job of programmers to adapt to the manufacturer. Sony have learned this the hard way, and it has cost them their market position.

oh btw, sony cut prices of the 80 GB version by about 100 dollars and and also cut the proce of the 40 GB version by about 100 dollars.

Um. Where did you get THAT from? They most certainly did not. 80 and 40GB systems still cost the same price they always have.

Sony dropped the price on the 60GB system just before announcing that it had been discontinued. So that doesn't even count as a price drop, but rather a clearance sale.

These Sony fanboys are really amazing. I'll just say these two things:

Compression: It will not mess up the way a game plays at all. You can zip files with freeware yourself and it works in a similar fashion.

Architechiture: The cell processor needs to run through six pipelines to be run properly. Sony does not give developers software to begin with so they have to go from scratch and get used to it (360 has two dual core processors but they offer XNA software which is very helpful).

The PS2 suffered the same sort of issue for a while. Maybe some have forgotten this, but the Dreamcast had games that rivaled the PS2 graphics years after it died out. The reason the developers did begin to jump on the Xbox bandwagon was because of the ease of development in comparison.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
No, see, if this was true, Sony's plan would have worked.

But it isn't. If you are claiming that PS3 games are demonstably superior to 360 games, you can hold that opinion all you want but it is not the general opinion of the industry. This was the whole point- the PS3, for all its extra complexity, is not actually producting, in any demonstrable way, significantly better results. The effort isn't worth it! Hence the cell issue IS still an issue- and it is particularly breahtaking to see people trying to claim that it is not an issue because games on the PS3 are now looking the same as on 360. The SAME? Are you frigging kidding me? The whole argument is that the cell is meant to make them run much better! Again, this is an argument of moving the goalposts- poor.

And as I said before, that PS3 architecture will still work a few years down the line is worth nothing when the 720 comes out- and you can say it is a bad idea all you like and that it will annoy current owners. Irrelevant- it will still do the job, and that kicks out the support of the 'futre-proof' argument.

Like I say, Sony isn't going to make this mistake again with the PS3, making a huge, inflated supersystem designed to last for so long. it has clearly lost out compared to simpler, short-term efforts, and only Sony's massive name brand, other support from its company tech base and- most crucially- the blu-ray issue has put the PS3 where it is- last place, though still in the game.

None of this makes the PS3 rubbish, its games rubbish, or people who enjoy tt silly. Nor does it detract from 360's reliability issues. But it's still foolish to ignore the handicaps its base architecture has caused, foolish to make it that the problems are on the same scale as the reliability ones when the market situation clearly shows that is not so- and exceptionally foolish to blame the programmers. It is the hardware manufacturer's job to produce stuff that programmers want to use, not the job of programmers to adapt to the manufacturer. Sony have learned this the hard way, and it has cost them their market position.

leonheartmm 😎

like i have said, the cell architecture is an oudated issue and is a thing of the past, as more and more developers have gotten around the issue. Multiplatform games will first begin to be identical in quality, but i believe the PS3 will start to distance itself in visual quality as well. The cell supposedly holds a lot of 'untamed' raw horse power superioer to the 360's, but what developer today is going to take advantage of that when their multi platform game has to have limitations could the 360 version isnt capable. It is infact futureproof, it has true HD, wi-fi, everything that leonheartmm said, blu ray, which is the...ONLY hd disc format out there, its just like the PS2 when DVDs came out. The extra storage space helps too, and dont take my word for it, developers themselves have stated it is futureproof, not just me.

And the cell arc can dish out significantly better results that any 360 game, despite the short length of Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, do you know what goes into that game?? Have you seen the visual fidelity? We have facial animation work that rivals any special fx company, breathing characters and muscle worked animation, just go watch the behind the scenes. Ratchet and Clank Future, which could be the works of Pixar, MGS4 which blows sh*t out of the water, Motostorm that looks just like the CGI trailer back in the day, WarHawk and more. Those games, are worth it. With games like Resistance 2 and LBP coming this fall, and the familiar PS2 game making its next gen debut Socom, they're plenty of games, that will showcase a bit of PS3. The PS3 will surely distance itself visually from the 360, with games like these as well as Heavy Rain, and i can probably bet on whatever Team Ico has for us. You dont even know if the 720 will do the job, so dont say it will

like back in the day around PS2's early life, what did they have? ATV Offroad Fury, Kinectica....and Ico? PS3 will get its "Ico" in due time.

Everyone realizes the past intially mistake of the PS3 in terms of marketing, but that IS an outdated issue, there is nothing anyone can do about that.

and compression can only do so much, and its on the horizon that the 360 is gonna have trouble with storage space problems, they gotta give atleast 2gb up on the get go for information specifically for microsoft, read my earlier post

and its 360 fanboys that amaze me, really. its absolutely amazing how you rally with a system that is losing steam thanks to its short term goals, a system that may literally be at its peak. tell me, whats after Gears 2, Fable 2 and Viva Pinata? another sequel and then what...nothing.

I got the PS3 and am enojying games like Heavenly sword, DMC4 and Viking, does Xbox 360 have all these games? also does the new GTA for 360 as well or MGS?

Not Heavenly Sword, but it has DMC4, GTA and I have no ****ing clue what Viking is.

Viking Battle for Asgard, an ok, not good, not bad, hack and slash in God of War style, multiplatform.

And is also available on the 360.

So both Heavenly sword and apprently the next Gow of War game is only on Playstation 3? ime glad I picked the PS3, also I prefer Darth Vader in Soul caliber 4 than Yoda

Originally posted by Burning thought
I got the PS3 and am enojying games like Heavenly sword, DMC4 and Viking, does Xbox 360 have all these games? also does the new GTA for 360 as well or MGS?

i like sony, but this just wrong.
dmc4, vikings and gta are all multiplat.

He cant be wrong if he's asking a question?

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
leonheartmm 😎

like i have said, the cell architecture is an oudated issue and is a thing of the past, as more and more developers have gotten around the issue. Multiplatform games will first begin to be identical in quality, but i believe the PS3 will start to distance itself in visual quality as well. The cell supposedly holds a lot of 'untamed' raw horse power superioer to the 360's, but what developer today is going to take advantage of that when their multi platform game has to have limitations could the 360 version isnt capable. It is infact futureproof, it has true HD, wi-fi, everything that leonheartmm said, blu ray, which is the...ONLY hd disc format out there, its just like the PS2 when DVDs came out. The extra storage space helps too, and dont take my word for it, developers themselves have stated it is futureproof, not just me.

And the cell arc can dish out significantly better results that any 360 game, despite the short length of Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, do you know what goes into that game?? Have you seen the visual fidelity? We have facial animation work that rivals any special fx company, breathing characters and muscle worked animation, just go watch the behind the scenes. Ratchet and Clank Future, which could be the works of Pixar, MGS4 which blows sh*t out of the water, Motostorm that looks just like the CGI trailer back in the day, WarHawk and more. Those games, are worth it. With games like Resistance 2 and LBP coming this fall, and the familiar PS2 game making its next gen debut Socom, they're plenty of games, that will showcase a bit of PS3. The PS3 will surely distance itself visually from the 360, with games like these as well as Heavy Rain, and i can probably bet on whatever Team Ico has for us. You dont even know if the 720 will do the job, so dont say it will

like back in the day around PS2's early life, what did they have? ATV Offroad Fury, Kinectica....and Ico? PS3 will get its "Ico" in due time.

Everyone realizes the past intially mistake of the PS3 in terms of marketing, but that IS an outdated issue, there is nothing anyone can do about that.

and compression can only do so much, and its on the horizon that the 360 is gonna have trouble with storage space problems, they gotta give atleast 2gb up on the get go for information specifically for microsoft, read my earlier post

and its 360 fanboys that amaze me, really. its absolutely amazing how you rally with a system that is losing steam thanks to its short term goals, a system that may literally be at its peak. tell me, whats after Gears 2, Fable 2 and Viva Pinata? another sequel and then what...nothing.

I don't even own a 360. But as for it being at its peak- it is no far off three years old! That's actually a pretty good time to be nearing your peak! The last Xbox only lasted four years in total, and I dare you to tell me, in light of sales, that bringing out the 360 so soon was an error, hmm?

As it is, there isn't actually any indication of that other than your biased dislike of it that it really is peaking. Every time we gets news like FFXIII coming out on it, its star rises still further.

Your argument is just going off the rails now. You just fruitlessly repeat that the cell thing is an outdated issue, ignoring all previous arguments pointing out why that is not so. Simply SAYING it is outdated does NOT make it true, you know. It's still more difficult to use and is NOT showing significantly better results. You apparently think it does. I do not. MOST people do not. Frankly, all I see from you there is partisan PS3 fanboyism. I, not owning a PS3 or a 360, look at the games on the two, many games, and my definite thought is "There is no quality difference between these two machines." And I will bet you this for sure as well- there never will be much of a difference.

You also ignore, basically, what I said about its futureproofing being pointless. You simply choose to ignore a lot of sutff people say against you, don't you? Poor. Again, to state clearly- being futureproof is useless if, in future, competitors simply bring out better things. This is what Microsoft will do. And frankly I reckon my bet that the 720 will be, hmm, a better machine than the 360 (Oh my god! What a bold assertion!) is a hell of a lot more likely than your blind nonsense in believing that the PS3 will sail onto a glorious future because of its over-priced, over-engineered tech is meant to last a decade. The market doesn't work like that.

No, the issue was NOT marketing, it was base design. And no, that is not an outdated issue either- being a design issue, it will be a PERMANENT one- the PS3 is a warning toe veryone that, even with an amazingly dominant market position, you shouldn't release a machine like that. Oh and frankly... do you really not think it is EXTREMELY poor if a new console takes years before people start to use it properly? Sheesh...

Blind defenders aside, the entire industry knows that the PS3 has been a bad move by Sony. The PS3 will NOT win them their market position back; only the PS4 can do that.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I don't even own a 360. But as for it being at its peak- it is no far off three years old! That's actually a pretty good time to be nearing your peak! The last Xbox only lasted four years in total, and I dare you to tell me, in light of sales, that bringing out the 360 so soon was an error, hmm?

As it is, there isn't actually any indication of that other than your biased dislike of it that it really is peaking. Every time we gets news like FFXIII coming out on it, its star rises still further.

Your argument is just going off the rails now. You just fruitlessly repeat that the cell thing is an outdated issue, ignoring all previous arguments pointing out why that is not so. Simply SAYING it is outdated does NOT make it true, you know. It's still more difficult to use and is NOT showing significantly better results. You apparently think it does. I do not. MOST people do not. Frankly, all I see from you there is partisan PS3 fanboyism. I, not owning a PS3 or a 360, look at the games on the two, many games, and my definite thought is "There is no quality difference between these two machines." And I will bet you this for sure as well- there never will be much of a difference.

You also ignore, basically, what I said about its futureproofing being pointless. You simply choose to ignore a lot of sutff people say against you, don't you? Poor. Again, to state clearly- being futureproof is useless if, in future, competitors simply bring out better things. This is what Microsoft will do. And frankly I reckon my bet that the 720 will be, hmm, a better machine than the 360 (Oh my god! What a bold assertion!) is a hell of a lot more likely than your blind nonsense in believing that the PS3 will sail onto a glorious future because of its over-priced, over-engineered tech is meant to last a decade. The market doesn't work like that.

No, the issue was NOT marketing, it was base design. And no, that is not an outdated issue either- being a design issue, it will be a PERMANENT one- the PS3 is a warning toe veryone that, even with an amazingly dominant market position, you shouldn't release a machine like that. Oh and frankly... do you really not think it is EXTREMELY poor if a new console takes years before people start to use it properly? Sheesh...

Blind defenders aside, the entire industry knows that the PS3 has been a bad move by Sony. The PS3 will NOT win them their market position back; only the PS4 can do that.

im not ignoring your posts, i say that the cell is an outdated issue because it is! There are development tools or kits whatever you call it, so that developers have an easier time, that means the issue is becoming outdated. As a consumer, how does that even effect you. Games are becoming identical in quality. Heck some PS3 games come with full length blu ray movies on it. I have to admire where you stand though, not owning either system. Because you have the ability to chose which system you would be interested in. When comparing the two, you take in price, quality, games, etc.

But these machines basically do a similar job, except for about 100 dollars more, you get a blu ray player(dvd/cd as well), built in wifi, a reliable system, true high def experience visual and audio, free online, the familiar rechargable dualshock controller with sixaxis, guaranteed storage space, an emmy award winning easy to use interface XMB.

i can probably bet 720 if it comes out will have improved hardware than any system on the market. Itll be like all those people that bought iphones for like 700 bucks only to find out in the next 4 monthes their coming out with a better faster stronger sleeker iphone for less than half the price, wonder how they feel. or we could do what you do and not actually have either consoles, and just complain blindly on topics that are infact outdated! not because i say so, and i wont mention why theyre outdated cuz i already did

what about PS2? it had things that it didnt need, like the ability to play DVDs, it was more expensive than a gamecube, you tell me what didnt last nearly a decade. Do people really care if Sony wins or does not win their last gen position back? how old is the PS3? like 2 years old? its sold more in its first year out than the 360 could. I also aknowledge that intially developers had a problem with the cell arc, but do they still have a problem with it now? im repeating myself here but are multiplatform games not identical? is SCIV not the same in quality on both systems? (sure one can say the gimpy yoda that cannot use the grab move or be grabbed is not as awesome as darth vader but hey whatever) they are identical in quality! developers know how to make games on PS3 better than they did before, that means its an outdated issue. and im going to stop here before General K talks to me about making video games.

im just going to respectfully agree to disagree, you believe what you want, let the future shed light on these issues

The toolkits do not make it an outdated issue. FFS, they're not even made by Sony, they're made by other developers! If it was an outdated issue, we still wouldn't have exclusives making their way to the 360. We wouldn't have games being delayed on the PS3 (the entire reason GTA4 was delayed half a year).

So, definitely, the toolkits do not make the cell arc's overcomplexity an outdated issue. It's simply a small group of developers going "Yeah, we know, Sony's made a ridiculously over-complicated system. It's incredibly difficult to program for. Give us some money and we'll give you some shortcuts!"

Also, I'm pretty sure that those of us who do own the systems did things like comparing price, quality, games, etc. when deciding what system to purchase. Otherwise we'd've not bought what we did. Hell, I deliberated for a good three months before finally taking the dive and buying myself a 360.

PS2s initially sold a lot because consumer DVD players were very new at that point and it was a cheap DVD player for its time. Which basically is the only reason the PS3 does sell as well as it does - it's a cheap blu-ray player. Its sales have nothing to do with the games. In fact, I've a feeling that the entire reason they made the 40GB system (and I have seen many, many people with similar thoughts), that cannot play anything but PS3 games, is because people were buying the system to watch movies but continuing to just buy and play PS2 games. Sony's not making money on the system, you know. Games and accessories are where there profits are coming from right now, in regards to their games division.

(also PS2 sales. By cutting out backwards compatability entirely from the main system they have on the market, they force people to either keep around their PS2, or buy a new one if they've gotten rid of it already)

SCIV is the same in quality on both systems - I have a friend who already has owned it on both (traded his 360 copy, which is now mine, for the PS3 version so he could get Vader). But, considering that the PS3 is meant to be a more powerful machine...the fact that they are the same in quality does not help your argument that it's an outdated issue at all. It simply shows that the issue is not there, that developers are not willing to put in the extra effort required to fully use the system's potential, because really, SCIV should be better quality on the PS3. Yet it isn't.

Also, re: HD...it still is not so common as many people say it is. HD-TVs are dropping in price, yes, but they're still very expensive and it's still a minority of people who own them.

Personally, I buy game systems to play games on. Nothing else. I don't care about being able to go on the internet, or watch HD movies (which I couldn't anyway as I don't own an HD-TV nor plan to anytime soon), or anything like that. If it plays games, that's all it needs to do. It's a game system, not a multimedia center. That's what my computer is for.

And of course when the 720 comes out it'll have better hardware. That's true of every time a new console is made. And it is not even close to being like Apple's release of the iPhone. That comparison would be better put to how they made the Pro 360 and then released the Elite (which was originally meant to be a limited edition sort of thing).

How long are you going to continue to repeat yourself?

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
im not ignoring your posts, i say that the cell is an outdated issue because it is! There are development tools or kits whatever you call it, so that developers have an easier time, that means the issue is becoming outdated.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Just because you claim it to be doesn't make it so.

Games are becoming identical in quality.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Yes, the multiplatform games on both systems tend to be nearly identical. So why should people pay more for a console... that does the same thing as the less expensive one?

But these machines basically do a similar job, except for about 100 dollars more, you get a blu ray player(dvd/cd as well),

built in wifi,

a reliable system,

true high def experience visual and audio,

free online,

the familiar rechargable dualshock controller with sixaxis,

guaranteed storage space,

an emmy award winning easy to use interface XMB.

i can probably bet 720 if it comes out will have improved hardware than any system on the market. Itll be like all those people that bought iphones for like 700 bucks only to find out in the next 4 monthes their coming out with a better faster stronger sleeker iphone for less than half the price, wonder how they feel.

or we could do what you do and not actually have either consoles, and just complain blindly on topics that are infact outdated!

not because i say so, and i wont mention why theyre outdated cuz i already did

what about PS2? it had things that it didnt need, like the ability to play DVDs, it was more expensive than a gamecube, you tell me what didnt last nearly a decade.

Do people really care if Sony wins or does not win their last gen position back?

how old is the PS3? like 2 years old? its sold more in its first year out than the 360 could.

I also aknowledge that intially developers had a problem with the cell arc, but do they still have a problem with it now?

im repeating myself here but are multiplatform games not identical? is SCIV not the same in quality on both systems? (sure one can say the gimpy yoda that cannot use the grab move or be grabbed is not as awesome as darth vader but hey whatever) they are identical in quality! developers know how to make games on PS3 better than they did before, that means its an outdated issue.

and im going to stop here before General K talks to me about making video games.

im just going to respectfully agree to disagree, you believe what you want, let the future shed light on these issues

Originally posted by General Kaliero
Something that only the hardcore high-tech junkies are currently obsessing over...

For the record, so does the Wii. And the DS.

The PS3 has had hardware issues, and software update issues, just the same as the 360.

Did you know that less than 30% of even the US TV-watching population owns an HDTV? The large majority of the market doesn't even experience high-definition video, and even fewer have an HD audio system.

Free and relatively gamer-free. Live is busier, regardless of your views on comparative quality.

The same old controller, with a half-assed attempt at stealing some of the Wii's motion-sensing innovation. The attempt didn't work, by the way.

Same as the 360, so that's not helping...

If you want to be technical, it was the PSP that won that Emmy. Not really a PS3 achievement. And if you want to talk about Sony and Emmys, remember when Sony falsely proclaimed that the SixAxis won an Emmy? Whoops.

Peach just showed why this is incorrect.

I like how you praised him for his position earlier in the same post. Now that's quality debating skills.

No, you didn't.

The PS2 did exactly the opposite of the PS3, not being the powerhouse of the generation, but being accessible and garnering a large third-party support. Kind of exactly like what the 360 is doing now.

Sony cares.

That's hardly a relevant point. It's the overall numbers that should be considered. Though I know you don't want to, because the gap is very clear there.

Yes.

They know how to port games to the PS3. Whatever happened to the PS3 being visually superior? That is the failure here.

What, worried you won't be able to ignore my facts this time?

You're free to disagree. You have every right to ignore the facts as you see fit.

yeah but the 360 doesnt have wi fi

PS3 hardware issues are nowhere near the 360's

where is the future headed? do standard tube television still sell? go to future shop and tell me how many oldeschool televisions they have, versus high def LCD or plasma.

a lot of people enjoy free PSN

same old familiar controller, universally accepted, tried tested and true. Sixaxis can be compared to the wiimote, it depends on what game you play. Ratchet and Clank Future uses it in small clever doses, and it works fine.

not every 360 model has a good amount of storage space, for those who chose to cheaper Arcade Model, you get like a ###MB card, storage space IS an issue, unlike the PS3, which games can be installed to speed up loading time, etc.

psp emmy, but what other system uses the same interface...

i praised him on not owning a console but not on him complaining about issues that i myself personally find outdated, and pointing out issues that a consumer would never think about, like Sony's position in the current console war, or development issues with games.

yes i did

the PS2 was not a 'powerhouse' but it produced great visual quality, shadow of the colossus, god of war, etc. and btw those third parties are not supporting 360 alone. just making things accessible on 360

Sony is not "people", people is the general public who buys these things.

the PS3 definately has the horsepower to be superior to the 360, with games like MGS4 that is visually breathtaking, it merely scratches the surface of whats capable. The thing with multiplatform games is they have to lower the bar so the 360 can handle it, so it would be identical. They want the game to sell on both systems, if we had a SCIV that was superior on PS3, people would be complaing to whomever made SCIV "why isnt the 360 version as good? 360 owners are getting the sht end of the stick wtf"

im not worried about what you have to say, i dont know how to make games, you apparently do, if there was a choice between a short easy road vs a long and hard one, theres an obvious choice right?

I am looking forward to run Ubuntu on my PS3, I heard contradicting voices about how good it works.

the wrong questions are being asked. todays games just arent pushing the envelope in terms of probessing power{other than a few like MGS which are sadly exclusive and hence no comparisons can be made} its like playing super mario from the NES on ps2 and x box. you wont see any graphic differences simply because the games hardly uses up a small amount of the alreayd present processing power. it doest have enogh DATA to actually push the system to its limits. only when such games are made will u be able to see the difference. also, true HD signals make a HUGE difference. this one you can trust me on.

Whats interesting is that all the developers have to lower the bar for PC games so Consoles can handle it hehe

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
im not ignoring your posts, i say that the cell is an outdated issue because it is! There are development tools or kits whatever you call it, so that developers have an easier time, that means the issue is becoming outdated. As a consumer, how does that even effect you. Games are becoming identical in quality. Heck some PS3 games come with full length blu ray movies on it. I have to admire where you stand though, not owning either system. Because you have the ability to chose which system you would be interested in. When comparing the two, you take in price, quality, games, etc.

But these machines basically do a similar job, except for about 100 dollars more, you get a blu ray player(dvd/cd as well), built in wifi, a reliable system, true high def experience visual and audio, free online, the familiar rechargable dualshock controller with sixaxis, guaranteed storage space, an emmy award winning easy to use interface XMB.

i can probably bet 720 if it comes out will have improved hardware than any system on the market. Itll be like all those people that bought iphones for like 700 bucks only to find out in the next 4 monthes their coming out with a better faster stronger sleeker iphone for less than half the price, wonder how they feel. or we could do what you do and not actually have either consoles, and just complain blindly on topics that are infact outdated! not because i say so, and i wont mention why theyre outdated cuz i already did

what about PS2? it had things that it didnt need, like the ability to play DVDs, it was more expensive than a gamecube, you tell me what didnt last nearly a decade. Do people really care if Sony wins or does not win their last gen position back? how old is the PS3? like 2 years old? its sold more in its first year out than the 360 could. I also aknowledge that intially developers had a problem with the cell arc, but do they still have a problem with it now? im repeating myself here but are multiplatform games not identical? is SCIV not the same in quality on both systems? (sure one can say the gimpy yoda that cannot use the grab move or be grabbed is not as awesome as darth vader but hey whatever) they are identical in quality! developers know how to make games on PS3 better than they did before, that means its an outdated issue. and im going to stop here before General K talks to me about making video games.

im just going to respectfully agree to disagree, you believe what you want, let the future shed light on these issues

Well then fine, we shall disagree. But you saying something STILL does not make it so, and I find it very interesting that you concede that both machines do the same job. Wasn't the PS3 meant to be MUCH better? Isn't that why it costs so much more to produce? Isn't that meant to justify why it is so much more awkward to make things for? The blu-ray drive you will not find me arguing about as something in the PS3's favour, but as for games go... it's just not showing as a quality improvement.

And it doesn't matter how many people get peed off by better tech coming along like that- the point is that it works as a market strategy, which is why touting the PS3 as a long-term investment flies against the current facts of the matter.

And there is no point at all in the PS3 having superior horsepower- which frankly we've not actually seen any evidence of- if it is too awkward for anyone to want to use it! And I feel your argument that they only look the same because they limit multiplatform games for the sake of the egos of 360 owners is... not a supportable one.