COD4 PS3 Version Will Be Superior to Xbox
alvinst...@hotmail.com
to enjoy the inferior version of the most anticipated title this
season. It has been confirmed that the PS3 version will support 18
players vs Xbox's 16. The PS3 visuals are also said to at least match
and probably exceed Xbox's. Sucks to be a
Xbot! lol
Mark Johnson
Old fucking news..get with the program
Doug Jacobs
COD4? "most anticipated title this season"? How pathetic.
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
Rowdy J
"Doug Jacobs" <dja...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:13ifkt6...@corp.supernews.com...
It's the most anticipated on the PS3 because it's just about all they
have that'll be any good this Xmas season.
CellFish
news:1193788187.0...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
* BREAKING NEWS * Microsoft has bowed out of the video games business and
announced its bankruptcy because a third-party's game will not support two
extra players.
In other news, Linux now has 99% market share and American cars are praised
for their reliability.
Rob
"CellFish" <nomor...@forme.com> wrote in message
news:4727dda7$0$30111$7836...@newsrazor.net...
CellFish
news:13ifpb6...@corp.supernews.com...
That's the Volvo effect actually. Ever since Ford bought Volvo, Volvo cars
have suddenly become more Ford-like (sudden ability to rust prematurely,
more frequent visits to the mechanic) and Fords have become more Volvo-like
(they actually work). Either way, I stand by my sarcastic comment.
Khee Mao
Mass Effect...
JoJo#1MSFanboy
alvinst...@hotmail.com says...
Where you gonna hide your head when it comes up short of the 360 version?
boodybandit
It has always been my most anticipated "shooter" this year.
I don't think there is a better shooter out or coming out any time soon.
Jordan
> "Doug Jacobs" <djac...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
>
> news:13ifkt6...@corp.supernews.com...
> > COD4? "most anticipated title this season"? How pathetic.
>
> It has always been my most anticipated "shooter" this year.
> I don't think there is a better shooter out or coming out any time soon.
Better <> "most anticipated".
Most anticipated shooter for the 360 was Halo 3. For the PS3 it's
Haze, for the Wii it was Metroid Prime.
- Jordan
Jordan
Wouldn't that actually require having 18 PS3 players online at the
same time? LOL. Good luck with that! :^)
- Jordan
Scrub
"Jordan" <lu...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1193804340.7...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Lol thats a good point. Then again, I've played 4 player games of lone
wolves on H3 when there's a few thousand people online..
Trevor Smithson
Doesn't suck to own a PS3 or 360. Does suck to be a loser whose
self-identity is wrapped up in a piece of hardware.
Oh yeah hello troll welcome to my killfile etc.
jeremi...@yahoo.co.uk
Only because it isn't possible for things to get any worse for the PS3.
boodybandit
Comprehension escape you on my response? "my"
Robert P Holley
I'm sure the PS3 version will be excellent, but I'd rather have rumble
and achievements so I will take the superior X360 version.
BTW, tough break about VF5 huh? First online play and now this.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/831/831623p1.html
"...Already a fine-looking game on PS3, VF5 looks even better on 360."
The alMIGHTY N
I can understand you going with the claim that the PS3 visuals are
better... but 2 more players? You're pretty desperate for life
validation.
The alMIGHTY N
Actually, the buzz for Call of Duty 4 has been much greater than for
Haze.
Rich
Yeah, it sucks so bad owning a console that my friends and family
actually play. I can buy the PS3 version and throw down with 17
strangers, or pick up the "inferior" 360 version and have a better
time because I know a ton of people who own the game.
The 360 sales of the game will still destroy the PS3's, thereby
keeping 3rd parties' primary interest in Microsoft's machine. Games
like Burnout that are unquestionably better on the PS3 will become
more rare than they already are.
elr...@pop.uky.edu
Once again we see the favorite phrase of PS3 fanboys: "Will be"
The PS3 will be getting great games
The PS3 will be outselling the 360 and Wii
The PS3 will be winning the console war
2007 will be the year of the PS3
2008 will be the year of the PS3
and, at this time next year:
2009 will be the year of the PS3
-Eric
elr...@pop.uky.edu
> It's the most anticipated on the PS3 because it's just about all they
> have that'll be any good this Xmas season.
Hey, they have the great "Heavenly Sword" with its massive sales of
200,000 units.
alvinst...@hotmail.com
Heavenly Sword was indeed great. Solid gameplay, amazing
presentation, good story. The game was extremely polished with no
glaring bugs or graphical glitches. The fact that it did not sell
millions does not effect the quality of the title.
jeremi...@yahoo.co.uk
Moriquendi
news:1193788187.0...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com:
Wow! 2 more players in multiplayer and graphics that will "at least match
and probably exceed" the 360 version! I really don;t know how I will
survive such a humiliating defeat for the 360.
--
MQ
The alMIGHTY N
Hallelujah!
I've had a few debates now about how the sales of a title has nothing
to do with the quality.
On the flipside, the fact that it got rated only in the 80s does
reflect the quality of the title.
slaye...@hotmail.com
I'm enjoying myself. I'll throw it out there and say I'm equally as
entertained as I was by Halo 3.
alvinst...@hotmail.com
Yea so was Halo 3. At HS offered something unique instead of the same
boring FPS Xbox turds.
alvinst...@hotmail.com
Just another chip away at Xbox's dominance. Of course, you also miss
the online goodness of Warhawk as well.
Doug Jacobs
> It has always been my most anticipated "shooter" this year.
> I don't think there is a better shooter out or coming out any time soon.
UT3?
Haze? That's even an exclusive title for the PS3.
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
Rob
And Toyota has dropped:
The same study found gains for Ford Motor Co. (F.N), which landed three
models on the magazine's "most reliable" list.
Consumer Reports ranked the Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan and the automaker's
market-leading F-150 pickup truck with a V-6 engine as among the
most-reliable new vehicles on the market.
"Ford continues to improve," David Champion, director of auto testing for
Consumer Reports...
Private Private
jury is still out on COD4 having better graphics on the PS3
But if Haze and Uncharted play and look good I might have to pick a PS3
up,Ebgames has an 80g with Motorstorm and 5 Blu-Ray movies for $499,not
too shabby IMO
The alMIGHTY N
You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but when you try to
make sweeping declarations about these games as if your opinion
actually mattered to anybody but yourself, you only look foolish since
the critics, whose word most consumers will take with more validity
than yours (if they even ever read your posts) all disagree.
The alMIGHTY N
I'm trying to decide myself. I only played the first two levels in
Halo 3 and I played about 15 minutes of Heavenly Sword.
On the one hand, Heavenly Sword felt to me not much different than
other hack-and-slashers I've played.
On the other hand, Halo 3 didn't capture me the same way the previous
2 games did. It was fun playing with my buddy, but playing through the
levels myself wasn't nearly as interesting.
alvinst...@hotmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
What a hypocritical statement. Calling HS a POS without any
supporting reasons is a sweeping lame generalization.
Mark Johnson
More and more people think the so called critics don't know what they
are talking about these days, Xbox and PS fans alike.
boodybandit
"Doug Jacobs" <dja...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:13ii3gd...@corp.supernews.com...
> boodybandit <allabo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> It has always been my most anticipated "shooter" this year.
>> I don't think there is a better shooter out or coming out any time soon.
>
Unreal is one of the best shooters ever made but there is no definitive
launch date.
Which would I rather have between COD4 and UT3? COD4. Both looks visually
stunning but I prefer realism over futuristic.
> Haze?
I have little to no interest in Haze. If it's any good at all I will be
suprised. So far I haven't seen or read a thing about the game that is of
interest to me.
> That's even an exclusive title for the PS3.
So than that should matter to me why exactly?
Blackheart
what offering was that? God of War in "Jiggly Mode"?
boodybandit
"Mark Johnson" <mark-j...@freeola.com> wrote in message
news:fgcjct$24in$2...@energise.enta.net...
That is because "fans" usually know more than the so called critics. Most
of these morons that review games are either non gamers and just do it as a
job or the hype the type of game they have to review. BTW, "ALL" reviewers
(people in general) give their opinions through their own bias, Even if they
dont't want to admit it they are bias just like most people, even people
that swear they aren't, are racist to some degree (regardless of what races
they harbor bitterness or fear of).
I read "some" reviews (usually only IGN's but I will skim over a few others)
but I take none of them seriously. Way too many 10's and far too many under
rated games this year.
I would rather hear opinions from consumers. That is the single biggest
reason I started coming here in the first place. Although, because the place
is so over run with small minded fanboys and immature assholes, I only pay
attention to a select few when it comes to opinions here.
boodybandit
"boodybandit" <allabo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0KadnZ5suqa_Zrfa...@comcast.com...
meant to say end up over hyping or actually hate the type of game
boodybandit
"Blackheart" <blackhear...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193964947.8...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Actually they offered a complex, yet easy to pick up, fighting engine that
is unique to most others in this genre.
Where it fell a little flat was in content and execution game itself. But
NT is on to something with this game and I hope they can get it right with
their sequel.
The alMIGHTY N
That would be true if I actually said that Heavenly Sword was a piece
of shit game. Look back at my posts and you'll find that I've never
said anything to that effect.
The only thing I've said about it was that it had nice graphics but it
felt like your standard hack-and-slash and got boring even in the 15
minutes I played. Plus, I noted every time I commented on it that my
opinion was based simply on the 15 minutes I played and not a full
play-through.
>From a personal standpoint, I can only go by what I've played of the
game thus far. However, I'll take the word of the reviewers, some of
whom said it was great and some of whom said it was bad, but all of
whom averaged out to a score around the 80% mark, over your word since
you're very obviously biased and only glean from reviews that support
your opinion.
Perhaps if you weren't making sweeping declarations written as if by a
10-year-old, people would take you a little bit more seriously. Note
that when boodybandit, King of Gaming, khee mao, slayer, and nick
soapdish, all of whom I frequently disagree with on games, the
industry in general, etc. say something good about a game, they don't
go on about how it's the best game ever and it's going to single-
handedly destroy the opposing console, yadda yadda. While I may clash
with their opinions on things, I'll even take their opinions over
yours because they don't feel the need to validate their lives based
on the failure or success of a console.
The alMIGHTY N
You're talking about hardcore fans. The average consumer looking to
choose between one of the two consoles is always going to look for
opinions and information from magazines, websites and the like. They
may not know about Metacritic or every website, but they'll get
opinions, maybe even from the employees at Best Buy, Target or
whatever store they're in.
However, they're not likely going to get anything out of this
newsgroup because the average person doesn't even know what Usenet and
Google Groups are.
The alMIGHTY N
>
> That is because "fans" usually know more than the so called critics.
That depends on the critic. There are plenty of critics out there who
have been gaming all their lives. I don't think it's prudent to
discount every critic because some, even most, don't know what they're
talking about.
> Most
> of these morons that review games are either non gamers and just do it as a
> job or the hype the type of game they have to review. BTW, "ALL" reviewers
> (people in general) give their opinions through their own bias,
Of course, everybody's biased. The trick is to get past as much of
your bias as possible. Also, it helps if you (as in the critic) are
assigned to review a game of a genre you actually enjoy... or at least
don't despise.
I'm not a fan of RTS or JRPGs at all. I've enjoyed a handful in my
life but for the most part I hate those games. It would be really
tough for me to ignore my bias just because I don't have the right
experience or context to speak to how someone who enjoys these types
of games would see this.
I'm a huge fan of shooters. Even if I didn't like a franchise or
license, I think I'd be able to put most of my bias aside and give a
relatively fair review. Further, it would be my responsibility to
disclose something like "I just don't like the art style but that's my
personal opinion" instead of just saying "the art style is crap."
Of course, not everybody's going to have the same standards as I do.
> Even if they
> dont't want to admit it they are bias just like most people, even people
> that swear they aren't, are racist to some degree (regardless of what races
> they harbor bitterness or fear of).
>
> I read "some" reviews (usually only IGN's but I will skim over a few others)
> but I take none of them seriously. Way too many 10's and far too many under
> rated games this year.
I actually like IGN because they've never steered me wrong in the
past. Maybe I just have similar tastes to some of their reviewers. I'm
not a big fan of Hilary Goldstein myself, no offense to him, but I
always like Matt Cassamassina's reviews. I didn't mind the Xbox guy
who just left, either.
> I would rather hear opinions from consumers.
My friend is the same way but takes it a step further. He *only* reads
reviews written by non-professionals that specifically focus on the
negative aspects of a game. He's not interested in hearing good things
about games because he feels that anytime somebody writes something
good, it's just their personal bias and they're probably exaggerating
how good it is because they like it.
I always point out to him that if somebody writes something scathing
about a negative aspect of the game, it's also probably exaggerated by
their personal bias against it.
> That is the single biggest
> reason I started coming here in the first place. Although, because the place
> is so over run with small minded fanboys and immature assholes, I only pay
> attention to a select few when it comes to opinions here.
That's the big caveat... in the end, it's still just opinions. I don't
take anyone's at face value right off the bat. I generally read for a
while to see how similar a reviewer's (professional or not) tastes are
to mine before I decide to leave out the grain of salt.
For example, I almost never buy games that my friend likes because he
has such strange tastes in games (he likes a lot of twisted Japanese
shit like some Dreamcast game where two half naked guys fly around
shooting white beams out of their foreheads like giant cocks... and he
even used that comparison to describe it which made me wonder about
him for a while LOL).
His tastes are so far off the norm that I can't possibly ignore it
whenever he tells me how great a game is. He actually got pissed at me
because I wouldn't take his "reviews" seriously, but I explained to
him that we have almost nothing in common when it comes to games we
like. The only things he's recommended to me that I didn't already
anticipate and ended up actually liking were Guitar Hero, Okami (I
can't wait for the Wii version) and Viewtiful Joe (the second one
wasn't as good), pretty much.
On the other hand, I hardly know you but you seem to have at least
somewhat similar tastes in games to me so even though we clash on some
things I'd probably listen more to your opinion than to my friend's.
Big Daddy
"boodybandit" <allabo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> That's even an exclusive title for the PS3.
>
> So than that should matter to me why exactly?
Doug is all about exclusives. In fact he rarely makes a post without
pointing out how there are no games to play on the ps3. He doesn't seem
to grasp that we can actually play non-exclusives on our console.
The alMIGHTY N
> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
To be fair, a potential consumer is going to evaluate the consoles not
only on the number of games there are but how many exclusives there
are. Games like Call of Duty 4, Grand Theft Auto IV, Madden,
Strangehold, etc. aren't going to factor into a decision-making
process because you can play them on either console.
A consumer will base their decision more on which console has the
greater number of exclusives they want to play. If the consumer really
likes the Halo franchise, they'll go with the Xbox 360. If the
consumer really likes the Ratchet and Clank franchise, they'll go with
the Playstation 3.
However, it's also tough to ignore seeing a much bigger section of
games for the Xbox 360 than for the Playstation 3. The diehard
Playstation fans who are adamant about playing the Sony-associated
exclusives will go for that box nonetheless, but a more casual gamer
or someone looking to purchase for a loved one is going to be more
likely to choose the Xbox 360 simply because there are more games to
play, exclusive or not.
Of course, price had to factor into it earlier in the year. Now, with
the $400 PS3 on its way, it pretty much just comes down to the games
(and to some extent the Blu-Ray capability).
Mark Johnson
Wrong, the more casual gamer buys a Wii
slaye...@hotmail.com
I am with you on that. If HS had a little more depth to combat I would
like it better. I really dislike games where you can be surrounded by
fifty guys and come out alive from just spamming attack. It reminds me
a lot of Dynasty Warriors (certainly not a bad thing), except instead
of a bunch of characters you get five mixed into one. Co-op would be a
blast though...
The alMIGHTY N
I didn't say "casual gamer," I said "more casual gamer." Casual gamers
- the ones who play Tetris and the like or just want a party machine -
will buy the Wii.
By "more casual gamer," I mean a person who plays typical video games
but just not as hardcore and crazy as others. Most of my friends are
casual gamers - they still play games like Gears of War or SOCOM but
they're not on there every single day playing hours on end... and they
wouldn't touch something like Ninja Gaiden with a 10-foot pole.
Doug Jacobs
> Doug is all about exclusives. In fact he rarely makes a post without
> pointing out how there are no games to play on the ps3. He doesn't seem
> to grasp that we can actually play non-exclusives on our console.
If you actually read my posts, you'd understand why I feel console
exclusive games are going to be the deciding factor in this generation.
Unless you have an instance where a multi-platform title offers something
more over the other versions - better graphics, extra content, etc. -
there is no reason to include that title in your decision on which console
to buy.
For games on the 360 and PS3 that look and play nearly identically, the
PS3 is going to be at a disadvantage solely due to its price. The $400
PS3 will help in some regards, but losing PS2 backwards compatibility
makes it a bit of harder sell. And if Sony doesn't care about the PS2
anymore, why are they planning a $99 mini-PS2 for '08?
Big Daddy
"The alMIGHTY N" <natl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194020019....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 2, 11:53 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> >> That's even an exclusive title for the PS3.
>>
>> > So than that should matter to me why exactly?
>>
>> Doug is all about exclusives. In fact he rarely makes a post without
>> pointing out how there are no games to play on the ps3. He doesn't
>> seem
>> to grasp that we can actually play non-exclusives on our console.
>
> To be fair, a potential consumer is going to evaluate the consoles not
> only on the number of games there are but how many exclusives there
> are.
Not necessarily. I was a potential consumer when I made my decision and it
wasn't based on exclusives at all. It was based on blu-ray capabilities,
free online play, the fact I could play my PS2 games on it (of which I had
more of around than xbox), the system seemed more powerful and thus future
proof, MS just dumped support of my xbox *completely* after 4 years so I had
no confidence they wouldn't do the same 4 years later again, etc. For me
it was worth the extra money for all of the above. Exclusives actually had
zero bearing on my decision as I knew games would come for whichever system
I chose (and there will always be some game on one that I wish I had that
isn't available on mine, whichever way i went).
I'm not saying I'm indicitive of most consumers, but my point is that
exclusivity counts, but there are a lot of other factors as well.
In fact, joe sixpack has probably limited interest in exclusives, or even
what games are exclusive to a particular console. They go to buy a gaming
system and see the game section and see a lot of games they want and they
have no idea if the 360 has it or the WII. As long as that game section is
large and filled with things their interest is peaked.
My point is, for me to keep reading "there are no games" always makes me say
"WHAT?" since I'm playing *something*...if it's not games then I'm really
confused.
Big Daddy
> For games on the 360 and PS3 that look and play nearly identically, the
> PS3 is going to be at a disadvantage solely due to its price.
True, if games were the only part of the equation. You have to factor
things like blue-ray, free online play, etc. Those are decision points
whether they matter to you personally or not. For a lot of people (myself
included) the price disadvantage was made up for with the other things (not
to mention I found the price disadvantage moot since if you own the console
for 4 years that's $200 in online fees you would pay for the 360, which
suddenly puts them both in the same pricing bracket in my case)
Nick Soapdish, Jr.
> "The alMIGHTY N" <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1194020019....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
I think that's a good point- the existence of exclusives, while
important, is still not as much of a factor as would be a system that
lacked games, period, whether they be multiplatform or not.
Of course, the Wii has sold a ton, despite the fact that it gets the
shaft as far as getting multiplatform games. That may be due to the
price factor........
Ethan Hammond
news:1193788187.0...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> Things just keep getting better for PS3. Looks like Xbox owners get
> to enjoy the inferior version of the most anticipated title this
> season. It has been confirmed that the PS3 version will support 18
> players vs Xbox's 16. The PS3 visuals are also said to at least match
> and probably exceed Xbox's. Sucks to be a
> Xbot! lol
But hey the 360 has Bioshock and the PS3 has Lair so they
have to give the PS3 one once in awhile!
--
All Purpose Culture Randomness
http://www.angelfire.com/tx/apcr/index.html
The alMIGHTY N
> "The alMIGHTY N" <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1194020019....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 2, 11:53 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >> That's even an exclusive title for the PS3.
>
> >> > So than that should matter to me why exactly?
>
> >> Doug is all about exclusives. In fact he rarely makes a post without
> >> pointing out how there are no games to play on the ps3. He doesn't
> >> seem
> >> to grasp that we can actually play non-exclusives on our console.
>
> > To be fair, a potential consumer is going to evaluate the consoles not
> > only on the number of games there are but how many exclusives there
> > are.
>
> Not necessarily. I was a potential consumer when I made my decision and it
> wasn't based on exclusives at all. It was based on blu-ray capabilities,
> free online play, the fact I could play my PS2 games on it (of which I had
> more of around than xbox), the system seemed more powerful and thus future
> proof, MS just dumped support of my xbox *completely* after 4 years so I had
> no confidence they wouldn't do the same 4 years later again, etc. For me
> it was worth the extra money for all of the above. Exclusives actually had
> zero bearing on my decision as I knew games would come for whichever system
> I chose (and there will always be some game on one that I wish I had that
> isn't available on mine, whichever way i went).
>
> I'm not saying I'm indicitive of most consumers, but my point is that
> exclusivity counts, but there are a lot of other factors as well.
True.
As a matter of fact, I was talking about the average consumer but
didn't specify that clearly. Further, I was focusing on the software
library, mainly because Blu-Ray is irrelevant to the average consumer.
In any case, if you take price out of the equation by comparing the
$400 PS3, the backwards compatibility truly becomes a non-factor.
> In fact, joe sixpack has probably limited interest in exclusives, or even
> what games are exclusive to a particular console. They go to buy a gaming
> system and see the game section and see a lot of games they want and they
> have no idea if the 360 has it or the WII. As long as that game section is
> large and filled with things their interest is peaked.
In that case, joe sixpack will see that the Xbox 360 has most of those
same games they want and a much larger section of games.
> My point is, for me to keep reading "there are no games" always makes me say
> "WHAT?" since I'm playing *something*...if it's not games then I'm really
> confused.
Absolute statements like "there are no games" are stupid. The fact of
the matter is that both systems have games but the Xbox 360 has a lot
more in general and a lot more that you can't play on the other 2
consoles.
Doug Jacobs
I've never considered Blu-Ray or HD-DVD as an advantage or disadvantage.
The home HD video market is just a mess right now, with various backers
forcing consumers to choose between which movies they can watch. Unless
one format totally dominates, and kills off the loser entirely (ala VHS
vs. Beta) any player that cannot handle both formats is a waste of money.
Buying into the market right now is basically taking a big gamble with
worse odds than a Vegas blackjack table.
Finally, if I'm buying a game console, I'm not going to consider its
merits as a movie or media streamer. Those might be "nice to have"
features, but chances are a dedicated device will out perform the game
console's implementation.
Online experience is an important consideration if you're into online
gaming. Even then, it's a bit misleading to simply compare the price of
the 360's online service with Sony's. First off, Sony's online is no
where near as universal as Microsoft's. By Sony allowing companies to put
up their own servers, you'll have to deal with a more fragmented
collection of gaming servers. Even Sony's main online service, Home,
won't officially launch for another 6 months(!) whereas Microsoft's Live
was already online months before the 360 debuted, giving developers plenty
of time to integrate online play into their games. Meanwhile, Sony failed
to tell even their 3rd party developers about their online offerings,
causing at least one game to drop its online support altogether.
At best you can argue that the two cannot be directly compared because the
PS3's main service hasn't gone public yet. However, all that really means
is that while Sony owners wait for something that should have been
finished months before the PS3 was to launch in the Spring of 2006, 360
owners continue getting more and more games with integrated online support.
GMAN
>On Oct 31, 2:02 pm, "alvinstraigh...@hotmail.com"
><alvinstraigh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 31, 8:33 am, elro...@pop.uky.edu wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 30, 9:03 pm, "Rowdy J" <row...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > It's the most anticipated on the PS3 because it's just about all they
>> > > have that'll be any good this Xmas season.
>>
>> > Hey, they have the great "Heavenly Sword" with its massive sales of
>> > 200,000 units.
>>
>> Heavenly Sword was indeed great. Solid gameplay, amazing
>> presentation, good story. The game was extremely polished with no
>> glaring bugs or graphical glitches. The fact that it did not sell
>> millions does not effect the quality of the title.
>
>Hallelujah!
>
>I've had a few debates now about how the sales of a title has nothing
>to do with the quality.
>
>On the flipside, the fact that it got rated only in the 80s does
>reflect the quality of the title.
>
duchebags.
GMAN
>"Rob" <bucf...@SPAMtampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:13ifpb6...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "CellFish" <nomor...@forme.com> wrote in message
>> news:4727dda7$0$30111$7836...@newsrazor.net...
>>> <alvinst...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1193788187.0...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Things just keep getting better for PS3. Looks like Xbox owners get
>>>> to enjoy the inferior version of the most anticipated title this
>>>> season. It has been confirmed that the PS3 version will support 18
>>>> players vs Xbox's 16. The PS3 visuals are also said to at least match
>>>> and probably exceed Xbox's. Sucks to be a
>>>> Xbot! lol
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> announced its bankruptcy because a third-party's game will not support
>>> two extra players.
>>>
>>> In other news, Linux now has 99% market share and American cars are
>>> praised for their reliability.
>> Actually, Ford has 3 vehicles listed on top for reliability.
>>
>
>
>That's the Volvo effect actually. Ever since Ford bought Volvo, Volvo cars
>have suddenly become more Ford-like (sudden ability to rust prematurely,
I have never seen a vehicle rust faster than a Toyota vehicle.
>more frequent visits to the mechanic) and Fords have become more Volvo-like
>(they actually work). Either way, I stand by my sarcastic comment.
>
HidariMak
consideration if you're into online
> gaming. Even then, it's a bit misleading to simply compare the price of
> the 360's online service with Sony's. First off, Sony's online is no
> where near as universal as Microsoft's. By Sony allowing companies to put
> up their own servers, you'll have to deal with a more fragmented
> collection of gaming servers. Even Sony's main online service, Home,
> won't officially launch for another 6 months(!) whereas Microsoft's Live
> was already online months before the 360 debuted, giving developers plenty
> of time to integrate online play into their games. Meanwhile, Sony failed
> to tell even their 3rd party developers about their online offerings,
> causing at least one game to drop its online support altogether.
Actually, IIRC Microsoft had Live in place years before the 360
launched, and there was better integration with new games one year
later than what the PS3 is seeing today. As you stated, in Sony's
case it's not centralized. And I believe it's more time and trouble
for third parties to set up their own online component than to pay the
fee (already subsidized greatly by those who want it) to utilize Live
support.
CellFish
news:1194618206....@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
To be completely honest, I'm surprised that as many games as there on the
PS3 are online. I have to hand it to Sony here. They created a very
fragmented network that promised to offer free online gaming and actually
delivered. Does it compare to Xbox Live? Probably not, but you don't really
care when you see your friend paying 60$ a year for online and you don't
have to pay a penny. Unfortunately though, not everyone has a mic (none
comes with the PS3), not everyone has a camera, there is no chat during
gameplay and so on... in addition, there is no standardization in the
equipment that people use to achieve these feats so the quality of the
experience varies.
The alMIGHTY N
By whose standards?
I find reviews very useful because otherwise, I'm just going by a few
tiny videos and photos to determine whether I should get a game.
Further, if some little dumbass spouts off about how so-and-so game is
the best game in the world and is going to single-handedly bury the
Xbox 360, I'll take the word of reviewers over his any day of the week.