[GG-Xtreme]

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

How is that even possible?...I can't imagine what you say is true for the vast majority of people.

As someone who know how to build a PC from parts, I know where to look.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

I wasn't aware that you could install any game you liked to the PS3 HDD. A few quick Google searches tells me that only some of the games have installs

Ok.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Not everyone is going to want to wait around at the start of the game installing it. Which is part of the reason why many people prefer console gaming in the first place.

Are you saying that most console owners lack the virtue of patience--is that the reason why most console games are released as lackluster?

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Its a moot point though, as within a few months, 360 gamers will have the ability to install the entirety of any 360 game they wish to the HDD

I wonder how many will actually use it, since you stated above that most console owners don't want to spend the time.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Plus, the whole DVD thing didn't really take off until DVD players were a lot cheaper than Blu-ray players are now. In terms of timeframe, DVD was finalised in 1995, but didn't really overtake VHS as the format of choice for 5 years or more. At that time, the PS2 was perfectly placed as a DVD player + games console package and was snapped up.

Blu-ray on the other hand, requires people to upgrade at least their TV set (and preferably their sound system as well), whereas DVD did not. It just gave a sharper picture on the resolution we already had.

If history repeats, this current generation of consoles will be all but over by the time Blu-ray comes close to mass-market penetration.

The rest of the hardware. The 360 generation is likely to be over before the PS3 generation. As most people complain, the PS3's potential has not been fully used yet.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

I'm still failing to see how anything else, apart from a web browser (which, incidentally, the 360 currently lacks. Make that a single strike against 360), would really be a huge benefit. It is a neat feature, and if I had a PS3 I would probably install Linux on it myself. But do people really need another PC? Whats the point in buying something that has a specific purpose, only to turn it into something that has a very general purpose?

Some gamers end up spending money on a PS3 before realizing that a PC CAN be cheap. Now the PS3 running Linux/Windows isn't anything special at the moment, but you can't assume that everyone who has a PS3 has a PC.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Fair enough. Sony's extensive Hi-Fi knowledge certainly give them an advantage here. But the 360s Media Centre capabilities aren't BAD by any means. Though you may have to fiddle around with codecs etc. I don't off-hand know of anything the PS3 can do, media wise, that the 360 can't.

I never said that the 360 media center is bad. Just not as good as the PS3's IMO. You can rip movie ISO's and music to the PS3's hard drive, and then access them from any PSP with an internet connection. I guess that's not saying much for the 360, since it doesn't have a portable platform that it can interconnect with.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

That is true. I'll give you that. But it does rely on you buying another piece of their hardware. Thats another £130 by a quick search on popular site.

I agree. But having the feature has to count for something.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

I know you have to pay for the Opera browser, but thats a one-off for that particular service. Online MP is free, but like the PS3, even in the best games, it isn't as fully featured or as easy to use as the 360's Live service is.

I agree, that's why I didn't mention multiplayer in my first post.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

I would imagine because Epic would like 360 gamers to buy Gears of War 2.

That is true, but Microsoft wouldn't reach an agreement on mod support with Epic for UT3 360, which is why they were stuck with nothing extra but splitscreen.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Fair enough, thats your opinion on the two. But just because you find one game on the console better than a similar game on another console usually isn't a reason enough to buy that console. Especially when there are 200+ other games on the system.

Having a lot of games doesn't mean anything.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

Ouch, thats harsh.

But no, I meant exactly what I said. The 360 has more good games than the PS3.

92 for 360
40 for PS3
20 for the Wii.

You can definitely say this is partly due to it coming out earlier, so having a foothold in the market, and attention from developers, for more than a year prior to the PS3. But the fact remains: If you want the largest choice of good games out of these three consoles, choose the 360.

I looked down a list of 360 games today. For me, most games fit into 2 categories: 'better on another platform' or 'I wouldn't play it'. That's just my opinion. I also found that the few ones I liked had little replay value, probably to get users to buy more games.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

However, the PS2, by far the favourite of the last generation, suffered a multitude of a problems. I know of several people that had to buy over 5 PS2s in the gaming lifetime of the console because they kept breaking.

Irrelevant, the PS2 is a last gen console that I never liked anyway. I guess I can see the trend of the worst console being the favorite every generation.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

[Point is: reliability issues aren't entirely debilitating, and unless they are extremely severe (your example is a marginal case), people will still buy.

I find that many failures severe, even if people insist on still buying it.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

The high entry price of PC gaming, as well as never having any formal "ranking" system in most games, has obviously an entirely different culture for many PC games. But alas, it is not entirely devoid of it itself either. I just have to look at one popular web-based game: Runescape, to find a festering pit of scum and villainy. Many-a-tale there has been of unscrupulous players luring newbies into the mist, killing them, and taking all their stuff.

PC gaming does not have a high 'entry price' at all, that is a common misconception. Very few games (such as Crysis) require PC's above $1000, but most games can be played on $500 or less PC's. And I don't mean the weekend-special Dell Inspiron, it's not my problem if people can't buy computer parts and assemble their own computer. The lack of typical ranking systems is because PC most gamers don't spend hours trying to get an achivement or move up in the ranks, they play to be with friends online and for fun. There are rankings and competitions available if that's what you like, but it stays friendly and clean, and it's usually a way to get to know someone. I agree that XBL is the second-best experience to the PC.

Runescape...*shudders*...don't mention that sin again...you should stay VERY far away from the dark side...

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

One could also argue, that the pay-for-play aspect of Xbox 360s online keeps out the very worst of the bad players. Since every time they want to start a new account and annoy some people, they have to pony up some more cash.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to pay-to-play multiplayer. All the PC games I have are free-to-play, but due to very efficient global moderation and GUID systems, when someone is banned, they stay banned.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

You just insulted a lot of people's favourite games there.

Anyway, this again comes down to a HUGE component of your personal preference. A million people play Halo 3, COD4 and GTA IV online, every week on 360. Each.

Just because the games presented the way they are, in comparison to those available on other platforms (again, PC doesn't really count in this discussion), don't appeal to you, doesn't mean that they don't to a lot other people.

Sports games, movie tie-in games, and some music games (Rock Band, Guitar Hero) are some of the most consistent sellers. Which, to boot, are available in abundance on the 360.

While I didn't mean to insult anyone, I was being completely honest. Maybe it's because I played PC shooters first, like UT2004 that I found Halo to be lacking in the 'fun' factor, but if someone asked me to play Halo 3 right now, I'd say 'No'. Of course, everyone has their preference, no problem with that. And I don't understand why you'd defend the 360 with games like COD4 and GTA IV, when they are on the PS3 as well. I guess COD4 is game most people would rather play on XBL, but the game itself is not much different.

Originally Posted by unpixelatedgamers

And so ends another colossal post...

I had to break my post in 2 :D

And I don't mean to offend anyone at all by my statements. I am just trying to defend my position.