Sony PS3 to be delayed to 07, and Cost $900 to make?

[Butter]

Originally Posted by stevew

I think you actually have that tv right? Maybe the 60' version from the previous year(with side speakers) IIRC?

I'm getting the 70 footer next year myself.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

I'm getting the 70 footer next year myself.

lol

That'd be like 10000000 dollars. I can't imagine how much the extended warranty would be on that beast.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by stevew

I think you actually have that tv right? Maybe the 60' version from the previous year(with side speakers) IIRC?

Unless it's just that much better, i think that the whole next gen dvd wars are just flaming retarded at this point.

Yes, I have the 60" version and most DVD's look spectacular on it.

Yet, I wonder how much better a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD would look. I sort of think it couldn't be that much better because the current DVD's look so amazing on this TV, then I waffle.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Yes, I have the 60" version and most DVD's look spectacular on it.

Yet, I wonder how much better a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD would look. I sort of think it couldn't be that much better because the current DVD's look so amazing on this TV, then I waffle.

I've never seen Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, but I used to think the same thing about HD-TV before I actually saw a sporting event in HD.

[PSUColonel]

I am going to be purchasing either the x-box 360 premium or the playstation 3 very soon. I don't just use it for games, but also as a CD player, and a DVD player. I saw that the PS3 will have a 60 gig drive versus the x-box 360's 20 gig drive. Can anyone run down the pros and cons of each, and perhaps make some suggestions. I don't have a lot of knowledge when it comes to game consoles.


Thanks

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I am going to be purchasing either the x-box 360 premium or the playstation 3 very soon. I don't just use it for games, but also as a CD player, and a DVD player. I saw that the PS3 will have a 60 gig drive versus the x-box 360's 20 gig drive. Can anyone run down the pros and cons of each, and perhaps make some suggestions. I don't have a lot of knowledge when it comes to game consoles.


Thanks

Yikes. This is bound to cause some 'discussion'.

If you are using it for all the multimedia stuff, they're probably pretty similar in the long run. It's going to run you about $600 either way. The 360 just released a feature where you can go online and download TV shows or HD movied to your hard drive for a fee, but Sony is widely expected to have something similar in the coming months. Also, you will have to pay $50 annually to access the online features on the 360. The PS3's hard drive can be replaced with a larger hard drive if you're looking to store more data. I'm not sure if the 360 allows anything larger than a 60 GB at this point. The Xbox 360 still has some overheating issues. The PS3 doesn't have any technical issues at this point. Obviously, if the system does have any issues, they should pop up in the weeks leading up to Christmas. I haven't done anything other than play games on a Xbox 360, so some of the owners should be able to tell you what it can do related to multimedia stuff.

One thing I do really like about my PS3 is that the menu to access all of the data and files on the hard drive is really nicely laid out. My wife, who is technically challenged, was able to wander around the interface without much problems.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I am going to be purchasing either the x-box 360 premium or the playstation 3 very soon. I don't just use it for games, but also as a CD player, and a DVD player. I saw that the PS3 will have a 60 gig drive versus the x-box 360's 20 gig drive. Can anyone run down the pros and cons of each, and perhaps make some suggestions. I don't have a lot of knowledge when it comes to game consoles.


Thanks

PS3 big in hip hop culture. You shoud get XBox 360.

[ISiddiqui]

Interesting article in the NY Times today from a non-techie perspective, I guess:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/ar...rtner=homepage

November 20, 2006
Video Games
A Weekend Full of Quality Time With PlayStation 3
By SETH SCHIESEL

Howard Stringer, you have a problem. Your company’s new video game system just isn’t that great.

Ever since Mr. Stringer took the helm last year at Sony, the struggling if still formidable electronics giant, the world has been hearing about how the coming PlayStation 3 would save the company, or at least revitalize it. Even after Microsoft took the lead in the video-game wars a year ago with its innovative and powerful Xbox 360, Sony blithely insisted that the PS3 would leapfrog all competition to deliver an unsurpassed level of fun.

Put bluntly, Sony has failed to deliver on that promise.

Measured in megaflops, gigabytes and other technical benchmarks, the PlayStation 3 is certainly the world’s most powerful game console. It falls far short, however, of providing the world’s most engaging overall entertainment experience. There is a big difference, and Sony seems to have confused one for the other.

The PS3, which was introduced in North America on Friday with a hefty $599 price tag for the top version, certainly delivers gorgeous graphics. But they are not discernibly prettier than the Xbox 360’s. More important, the whole PlayStation 3 system is surprisingly clunky to use and simply does not provide many basic functions that users have come to expect, especially online.

I have spent more than 30 hours using the PlayStation 3 over the last week or so and may have played more different games on the system — 13 — than probably anyone outside of Sony itself. Sony did not activate the PS3’s online service until just before the Friday debut. Over the weekend a clear sense of disappointment with the PlayStation 3 emerged from many gamers.

“What’s weird is that the PS3 was originally supposed to come out in the spring, and here it came out in the fall, and it still doesn’t feel finished,” Christopher Grant, managing editor of Joystiq, one of the world’s biggest video-game blogs, said on the telephone Saturday night. “It’s really not the all-star showing they should have had at launch. Sony is playing catch-up in a lot of ways now, not just in terms of sales but in terms of the basic functionality and usability of the system.”

Sadly for Sony, the best way to explain how the PlayStation 3 falls short is to explain how different it is to use than its main competition, Xbox 360. When I reviewed the 360 last year, I wrote: “Twelve minutes after opening the box, I had created my nickname, was in a game of Quake 4 and thought, ‘This can’t be this easy.’ ”

I never felt that way using the PlayStation 3. With the PS3, 12 minutes after opening the box I realized that Sony inexplicably does not include cables to connect the machine to a high-definition television. Keep in mind that one of Sony’s main selling points has been that the PS3 plays Blu-Ray high-definition movie discs. But high-definiton cables? Sold separately. The Xbox 360, by contrast, ships with one cable that can connect to either a standard or high-definition set.

Then, before you are even using the PS3, you have to connect the “wireless” controller to the base unit with a USB cable so they can recognize each other. If you bring your PS3 controller to a friend’s house, you’ll have to plug back in again. The 360’s wireless controllers are always just that, wireless.

If there is one thing one would expect Sony to get perfect, though, it would be music. Wrong. Sure, you can plug in your digital music player and the PS3 will play the tunes. But as soon as you go into a game, the music stops. By contrast, one of the things I’ve always enjoyed most on the Xbox 360 is being able to listen to my own music while playing Pebble Beach or driving my virtual Ferrari. Doesn’t seem too complicated, but the PS3 can’t do it.

In that sense it often feels as if the PlayStation 3 can’t walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. In the PS3’s online store (which feels like a slow Web page) you can access movie trailers and trial versions of new games, but when you actually download the 600-megabyte files, you’ll be stuck watching a progress bar crawl across the screen for 20 or 40 minutes. Astonishingly, you can’t download in the background while you go do something that’s more fun (like play a game). On the Xbox 360, not only are files downloaded seamlessly in the background, but you can also shut off the machine, turn it on later, and the download will resume automatically.

The PS3’s whole online experience feels tacked-on and unpolished. On the Xbox 360 each user has a single unified friends list, so you can track your friends and communicate with them easily, no matter what game you are in. On the PlayStation 3 most games have their own separate friends list and some have no friends function at all. There is a master list as well, but in order to communicate with anyone on it, you have to quit the game you are playing.

There are some high points. The multi-player battles in Resistance: Fall of Man are excellent. The arcade-style action in the downloadable Blast Factor is suitably frantic.

But the list of the PS3’s disappointments remains, from its undersupported voice chat to its maddening cellphone-like text messaging system. (In frustration I ended up plugging in a USB keyboard.) Overall, Sony seems to have put a lot of effort into cramming as much silicon horsepower under the hood as possible but to have forgotten that all the transistors in the world can’t make someone smile.

And so it is a bit of a shock to realize that on the video game front Microsoft and Sony are moving in exactly the opposite directions one might expect given their roots. Microsoft, the prototypical PC company, has made the Xbox 360 into a powerful but intuitive, welcoming, people-friendly system. Sony’s PlayStation 3, on the other hand, often feels like a brawny but somewhat recalcitrant specialized computer. (Sony is even telling users to wait for future software patches to fix some of the PS3’s deficiencies.) The thing is, if people want to use a computer, they’ll use a computer.

Through the decades of the Walkman and the Trinitron television, Sony was renowned as the global master of easy-to-use, seamlessly powerful consumer electronics. But recently Sony seems to have lost its way, first in digital music players, in which it ceded the ergonomic high ground to Apple’s iPod, and now in home-game consoles. For now Sony’s technologists seem to have won out over the people who study fun.

As a practical matter, given the limited quantities Sony has been able to manufacture, the PlayStation 3 will surely remain sold out throughout the holiday season. If you can’t find one, don’t fret. Sony still has a lot of work to do. As Mr. Grant of Joystiq put it: “Maybe in six months it’ll be finished. Maybe by next fall I’ll be able to do all the cool stuff. I’m still kind of waiting.”

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I am going to be purchasing either the x-box 360 premium or the playstation 3 very soon. I don't just use it for games, but also as a CD player, and a DVD player. I saw that the PS3 will have a 60 gig drive versus the x-box 360's 20 gig drive. Can anyone run down the pros and cons of each, and perhaps make some suggestions. I don't have a lot of knowledge when it comes to game consoles.

The hard drive size of the 360 does not necessarily matter for media playback. You can stream files from a networked PC and play them on the 360. For example, I have my entire CD collection ripped to WMA files on my PC (did this long before I got a 360), and I can access all those music files and playlists from my 360 across the network. You can also plug in flash drives or anything else with a USB connection to play on the 360.

[PSUColonel]

Plus, I might actually be able to get my hands on a 360. I am interested to see how much 360 sales rise as a result of the PS3 launch.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Arles

XBox 360 + Gears of war = $460

PS3 + Resistance = $660 if you wait out in the rain, dodge bullets and are lucky enough to be high inline OR about $1000 if you decide to buy online from one of the online "bundle" outlets.

Maybe I'm missing something, but is the PS3 worth between 145% and 200% more than the XBOX 360? I can sort of understand the rush for the 360 as there was nothing really comparable out at launch. But with a viable alternative out now, it doesn't make a lot of sense to see all this money people are willing to pay to get the PS3.

I guess having the ability to play a collection of old PS2 games (prob worth around $100 now) must be worth all that extra cost. Heck, for all those people pointing to "backwords compatability", you could go out and buy the XBOX 360 + Gears of War, Madden, NBA 2K7, Tiger Woods and another game of your choice and still come out less than buying the PS3 and one game.

I understand the hardcore gamers with both systems getting it or even Blue Ray fans, but I don't really see why most normal families/people without either would spend all this money for the PS3 with the XBox 360 readily available.

I think that might be just a tad unfair of a comparison. It's a little more than that unless you're a FPS junkie and that's all you care about:

XBox 360 + Gears of war + Current Library Wants + Future Library Wants = $460 - Cost of Possible Future Price Drops + Cost of Current Library + Cost of Future Library

PS3 + Resistance + Future Library Wants = $660 if you wait out in the rain, dodge bullets and are lucky enough to be high inline OR about $1000 if you decide to buy online from one of the online "bundle" outlets - Cost of Possible Future Price Drops + Cost of Future Library

This is what has gnawed at me to this day about the Xbox library. Unless you were a sports or shooter fiend, you were left with a handfull of worthwhile titles. You compare Resistance and Gears of War like they're the only two titles. I'd take Oblivion over either of those in a heartbeat.

SI

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Interesting article in the NY Times today from a non-techie perspective, I guess:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/ar...rtner=homepage

[/b][/color]

Obviously just a Microsoft fanboy.

[sterlingice]

Actually, it does sound a little fanboyish. Unnecessarily scathing at points. It basically reads like a 9th grader who was told on a standardized test to write a compare/contrast essay and take a position, writing a paper structured "sony sucks at this, but my-- err... the 360 does this better"

SI

[Raiders Army]

FWIW, the PS3 with Blu-Ray is $600. The Xbox 360 with HD-DVD Drive is $600.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

FWIW, the PS3 with Blu-Ray is $600. The Xbox 360 with HD-DVD Drive is $600.

Unfortunately until they get the supply concerns met, it's more like PS3 with BluRay is 2000, Xbox 360 with hddvd drive is 600.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

FWIW, the PS3 with Blu-Ray is $600. The Xbox 360 with HD-DVD Drive is $600.

I heard that the Blu-Ray looks great with the RCA cables that ship with the PS3.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Plus, I might actually be able to get my hands on a 360. I am interested to see how much 360 sales rise as a result of the PS3 launch.

In Canada Best Buy had a big one day event last Friday, and they offered the 360 Pro for 449.99 CDN (regular is 499.99 CDN) with Gears of War, Ridge Racer 6, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter and Xbox Live Arcade Unplugged. Great deal. And they're also guaranteeing that 360 will be in stock until Xmas or else you get a $30 gift card.

[Eaglesfan27]

If true, another mis-step for Sony:

Report: Sony dallying cost PS3 exclusives

Newsweek report says Ken Kutaragi's "slowness" allowed Assassin's Creed and GTA IV to go to the Xbox 360.

By Tor Thorsen, GameSpot
Posted Nov 20, 2006 12:55 pm PT


This past spring, Ubisoft announced Assassin's Creed, a visually stunning PlayStation 3 stealth-action game that impressed members of the gaming press at E3.

While the French publisher did drop many story details about the game, which is set in medieval Jerusalem during the Crusades, it danced around the question of whether the game would be exclusive to Sony's new console. Though early Assassin's Creed press releases only mentioned the PS3, the game was shown off at Microsoft's X05 event last fall as "Project Assassin." For their part, Ubi reps danced around the subject of whether or not the game would would be released on other consoles...until they finally fessed up the game would come to the Xbox 360 and PC.
At first, many chalked up the confusion to the dissembling that is all too common in game-publisher public relations. However, a recent Newsweek article says that, for a time, Assassin's Creed was indeed intended to be a PlayStation 3 exclusive. In his blog Level Up, correspondent N'Gai Croal reports that both the Ubisoft game and Grand Theft Auto IV were both slated to debut solely on the PS3--but slowness on the part of Sony cost the electronics giant both franchises.

"We've learned that Take-Two [Interactive] and Rockstar Games were interested in continuing their longtime relationship with Sony, in which they premiered their Grand Theft Auto games on PlayStation platforms exclusively for 6-12 months before bringing them to other systems," wrote Croal. "Also, Ubisoft was interested in making Assassin's Creed, due in stores next spring, exclusive to the PS3."

So what happened? According to Croal, "For the greater part of this year, PlayStation chief Ken Kutaragi hadn't finalized the business terms for independent publishers on the PS3," wrote Croal. "[But] PlayStation's Japanese headquarters was effectively radio silent, and without Kutaragi's signoff, the normally independent American and European branches had no authority to reach agreements on the exclusives they believed could be valuable to the PS3 cause."

According to Newsweek, while Sony played the waiting game, Microsoft contacted both Take-Two and Ubisoft and offered them very generous terms to bring Assassin's Creed and Grand Theft Auto IV to the Xbox 360. Croal cites an unnamed source at one of the companies as saying, "I do have to give Microsoft a lot of credit for going after titles and doing whatever they can to generate third-party support. They've been magnificent in this generation."

Though Sony Computer Entertainment America had not returned GameSpot's requests for comment, its executive vice president, Jack Tretton, told Newsweek that the 360 GTA IV was all its publisher's idea. "There was interest on Take-Two's part to bring Grand Theft Auto onto Xbox platforms," said the executive. "We wouldn't encourage them to do that. The interest came from them."

[DanGarion]

Have you guys heard that Taco Bell is giving $12,500 in taco bucks to someone that gives them a PS3? They are going to be donating it to the Boys and Girls Club I grew up going to.

This is the Boys and Girls Club my mom is the executive director of. Before she worked there I grew up going here from the time I was 7.

Now I'm the technical consultant for them and do all their computer and networking work for them, as well as technical suggestions on all things electronic and computer oriented.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by stevew

Unfortunately until they get the supply concerns met, it's more like PS3 with BluRay is 2000, Xbox 360 with hddvd drive is 600.

I can only hope that that stays true. We're posting ours on ebay this upcoming weekend to end in early DEC.

[Deattribution]

Sadly the PS3 market is lower than at any point, I saw one go for 570 on ebay, while others mostly stay around 800-1000 unless you give a bunch of acessories and games. All the outrageous ones are usually from guys with no positives and likely never follow through.

[Kodos]

I say good. Screw the price gougers.

[ISiddiqui]

Don't blame them, blame the idiots that are willing to spend so much on a freaking console.

[Kodos]

I blame them both. I wouldn't feel good about myself for taking advantage of people like that, even if it is rich idiots that are being exploited. Obviously, there are plently of folks who have no problem with it.

[Neuqua]

IDIOTS

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I blame them both. I wouldn't feel good about myself for taking advantage of people like that, even if it is rich idiots that are being exploited. Obviously, there are plently of folks who have no problem with it.

No one HAS to have a PS3 right now. It isn't a necessity. Supply and demand dictates the price on the secondary market. If you stood on line and waited with everyone else, I think you should be able to do what you want with your product. If that means sell it at a markup, so be it. After all, these sellers waited in line (if the were official sellers, they'd have to sell at MSRP) longer for the product.

[PSUColonel]

I bought the 360---eventually it will likely have an add on for blue ray I would imagine.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I bought the 360---eventually it will likely have an add on for blue ray I would imagine.

Likely only if Blu-ray is the ultimate market leader. If HD-DVD causes it to pull a Betamax, Microsoft will just take satisfaction in Sony's misfortune, continue to offer the HD-DVD drive, but really try to drive the Video Marketplace.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Just an FYI.....I noticed that Sony will be sending out an update to address the resolution downgrading problem that had been a problem for some users. Nice to see them respond quickly to getting a fix for that.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by stevew

Unfortunately until they get the supply concerns met, it's more like PS3 with BluRay is 2000, Xbox 360 with hddvd drive is 600.

This is kind of my point. If there were just as many PS3s out there as 360s, then I'd say it's a wash *IF* you want the upgraded DVD.

However, if you are a parent looking for a system for your kids and your options are:

1. Pay $400 for an Xbox 360 (can be found anywhere) with the option of adding HD-DVD for an extra $200 (but not required).

2. Pay $600 for the PS3 after camping out in front of some store for days

3. Pay between $800 and $2000 for a PS3 via ebay and hope the seller is legit (you also have to wonder about service plans, given this is the initial release).

I don't see why any parent would choose 2 or 3. Now, I see why serious gamers may or even hi-tech fans. And, for the record, I will have both the Xbox 360 and PS3 shortly (so it's not like I have a major dog in the fight).

My point was simply that I just don't see why "John Q Parent" would go the PS3 route this Christmas.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Here's a good general review of the PS3 that covers both the gaming and the multimedia features of the system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230798,00.html

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Here's a good general review of the PS3 that covers both the gaming and the multimedia features of the system.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230798,00.html

I find this article no less biased than the one in the NY Times, and of course Sony has been advertising heavily in that mag..

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I find this article no less biased than the one in the NY Times, and of course Sony has been advertising heavily in that mag..

Beyond the price and potentially the online service (it's apparently still up in the air) where is the problem?

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I find this article no less biased than the one in the NY Times, and of course Sony has been advertising heavily in that mag..

It's probably a pretty good idea to not hold any of his opinions in high regard.

[SirFozzie]

Bloomberg now reporting there may only be 400K PS3's (the original launch target) by end of year...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=acYmICIySKBw

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Bloomberg now reporting there may only be 400K PS3's (the original launch target) by end of year...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=acYmICIySKBw

If so, that'll help the people who haven't sold their PS3's yet. eBay market around Christmas = $$$$.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Bloomberg now reporting there may only be 400K PS3's (the original launch target) by end of year...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=acYmICIySKBw

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I find this article no less biased than the one in the NY Times, and of course Sony has been advertising heavily in that mag..

What about it was inaccurate? Just curious.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

What about it was inaccurate? Just curious.

What about the NY Times article was inaccurate? Both have a slanted view point, IMO. One is positive and one is negative. Gross inaccuracies do not have to be present to slant an article.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

What about the NY Times article was inaccurate? Both have a slanted view point, IMO. One is positive and one is negative. Gross inaccuracies do not have to be present to slant an article.

They went out of their way to constantly point out the greatness of the 360 in an article that was supposed to be a review of the PS3. The other article took time to review the features in the PS3 alone. One console does not have to be bad for the other to be good. When you see an article like what the Times put out, it makes you think less of the writer. Certainly the bias in the Times article was an attack on a console more than a review of a console.

It is pretty obvious that the Times reviewer owns a 360 and has some bias towards that system by his comments. Several of the things that he pointed out as 'difficult' or 'clumsy' are easily remedied by most users. In fact, I prefer the ability to make a lot of the changes in my network and multimedia settings that caused him to not like the PS3. He said it took him 12 minutes to figure out that he needed video cables for HD. I can only imagine how much reading it took him to figure out how to insert the games into that funny slot on the front of the console. Sarcasm aside, as others have already said in this thread, it's a poorly written article for someone that was supposed to be providing an unbiased review of a product.

[rkmsuf]

I like the guys who smash them in front of the people camping out. Saw two videos of those people and the horrified people in line. 2 down, 399,998 left in America.

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

They went out of their way to constantly point out the greatness of the 360 in an article that was supposed to be a review of the PS3. The other article took time to review the features in the PS3 alone. One console does not have to be bad for the other to be good. When you see an article like what the Times put out, it makes you think less of the writer. Certainly the bias in the Times article was an attack on a console more than a review of a console.

It is pretty obvious that the Times reviewer owns a 360 and has some bias towards that system by his comments. Several of the things that he pointed out as 'difficult' or 'clumsy' are easily remedied by most users. In fact, I prefer the ability to make a lot of the changes in my network and multimedia settings that caused him to not like the PS3. He said it took him 12 minutes to figure out that he needed video cables for HD. I can only imagine how much reading it took him to figure out how to insert the games into that funny slot on the front of the console. Sarcasm aside, as others have already said in this thread, it's a poorly written article for someone that was supposed to be providing an unbiased review of a product.

Not to bring politics into this, but do you suppose this is a result of the mainstream liberal media's love for Bill gates, Microsoft, and everything else that is Seattle?

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Not to bring politics into this, but do you suppose this is a result of the mainstream liberal media's love for Bill gates, Microsoft, and everything else that is Seattle?

Buh? Where the fuck did this political shit came from?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

They went out of their way to constantly point out the greatness of the 360 in an article that was supposed to be a review of the PS3. The other article took time to review the features in the PS3 alone.

As the main competition in the console wars, I think it is very fair for a reviewer to compare a product to its big competitor and point out where it comes out short and where it comes out better.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Buh? Where the fuck did this political shit came from?

It came from someone who is apparently a troll...

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by sabotai

It came from someone who is apparently a troll...

True dat.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by sabotai

It came from someone who is apparently a troll...

I don't think I'm being a troll at all, above I had a very legit question, and I am actually trying to make a legit point. I have worked in media and politics for years, trust me, there is substance to what I am saying.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I don't think I'm being a troll at all, above I had a very legit question, and I am actually trying to make a legit point. I have worked in media and politics for years, trust me, there is substance to what I am saying.

I don't think they were talking about you this time.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I don't think I'm being a troll at all, above I had a very legit question, and I am actually trying to make a legit point. I have worked in media and politics for years, trust me, there is substance to what I am saying.

First there's discussion of Sony vs Nintendo vs Microsoft's systems..

Then you jump in with "I think that people are praising XBox 360 in print because the librul media loves Bill Gates, Microsoft and Seattle"

You don't think that's trolling?