NY Times: The PS3 "isn't that great"

"Well, I'm sold. Because as we all know, it's the menus that make all the difference."

Ease of use is a big thing. If I have to go through menus to set up every little thing that I hook up to the PS3 it's just not very intuitive. Especially when finding said option is buried beneath another menu..and then another. 360 is plug and play thus making things easier and making way for getting into game quickly. So yes. Menus matter. Games ultimately matter the most and at this point the 360 has that card as well. I look forward to the upcoming PS3 lineup but for right now it's not a must buy system.

It's easy to say the 360 had a year worth of dashboard or firmware updates, but at the same time, Sony had a year to improve upon the technical aspects of the 360.

And really, Sony had many years to formalize an online plan. Microsoft has had a plan since the original Xbox.

> What i do like to see is people comparing
> Resistance:FoM with Gears of War
> i think thats awesome

This is the one marginally intelligent thing said in this entire thread. Marginally.

When I was 7, I told my mom that i wanted the Legend of zelda, and it was $50! She said that that was too much money to pay for a game that i'd only play for a week, so she made me promise that i'd play it forever. I still play that game to this day. Ahh, memories. I only owned smb and zelda for the original nintendo, but I still loved that system, I rented games about every weekend. Those were the days, when there were hundreds of carts to choose from, even if most of them were dreck.

Why would anyone pay more money for a lesser quality system just because of the name?

All reviews I am seeing are saying 360 is a better machine for less money and then here "they're bias".

As for their "free online service", you get what you pay for.

By the way. The it is not Microsoft's fault that the PS3 build came out a year later. I am always worried about expensive hardware that comes out flawed. Mistakes were made with the PS3 from the beginning. I don't think going into this Sony said let's delay our machine twice. So yes, everyone has had the 360 because there was no one else out there. They should have the better games now, but even with the PS3 being delayed twice, this did not give their developers an advantage. They should have had 40 games at launch with their delays.

everyone seems to be forgetting that with the year in between 360 and ps3, developers had all that time to see what the games were like on 360 and with the extra time they should have been able to improve upon them.

sony should have used the extra time caused by their delays to make sure they had as strong a launch as possible knowing full well they would be competing against 2nd gen 360 games. the point is they didnt do it, so right now the 360 is the better console for games head start or not. it will be no different a year from now, sony will still be competing with a system that has had a head start and will have to play catch up from now on with the 360

Like it or not, Sony -- not anyone else -- drove the hype machine on the PS3 to extraordinary levels while belittling the competition (anyone remember that "Xbox 1.5" crap they were slinging?). They set themselves up as the gods of the game business that no one could compete with. They quoted inflated and selective stats to make the box sound awesomely powerful -- to the point that even when faced with the reality, apologists still think it blows the Xbox out of the water in terms of raw horsepower. This was supposed to revolutionize how we played games, it was 4D, it was going to enable new experiences unlike anything that went before. This was supposed to be the machine it was worth working overtime to save for.

Given all that, for it to come out and not be competitive with a less expensive system that has a cleaner user experience and better games is a complete embarrasment. Sony did not give themselves the luxury of coming out broken and gradually getting up to speed.

They made huge promises and haven't delivered on any of them.

And just for you guys who think Joystiq is being biased, maybe you should read up on the news a bit more.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/20/news/companies/sony/index.htm?postversion=2006112014

And that gives Joystiq enough credibility. Now all you guys that want to say Joystiq is being biased and say they are giving Wii too much airtime can shut up. Before you even open your mouths, read that link. Then, you can talk.

I have to admit I find 90% of the comments on this article completely hilarious and utterly ridiculous. It’s great to see so many people hold such asinine biases and portray them and spoken gospel.

If a person ever wondered how long a pointless unwinable war could go all they would have to do is come to a console review or any such.

The man wrote a review about his "personal" account. His statements should hold no more value than someone you pass on the street. Since when did blogs, journals, and such count as fact?

Next someone should make this even more partisan and compare it to the elections or something else as irrelevant to the topic.

But before I fall into the trap of most that came here, I must say thank you for the incredible laughable read. It truly entertained me at work.

Listen... We know we're not gonna have the world's best line-up at launch. That's why I typically wait until after a console has been out for a little time so the gamebase will grow.

First off, the PS3 ISN'T that great. There is a lot to do to play the few games that are available. Not saying I'm NEVER gonna pick one up, but probably in a year or two, when the games have proven themselves to me. I'm not sold just yet.

Also, there was TOO much hype for the overrated thing. You end up paying $600 for a system that you can't do anything with other than watch Blu-Ray for the next half a year... Oblivion is the only title coming out for the PS3 that I see worth getting until then. FF XIII doesn't come out for a WHILE... And one of the biggest possible launch line-uppers was scrapped: SmackDown vs Raw 2007. That would've made the system a little more playable. But now the 360 is reaping that.

I know that the rumble was removed because of the suit, but the Sixaxis thing? They were desperately racing for a replacement and used a dubbed down version of the Wii to fill the gap. What can you do with it? Juke in NBA 07... That's it. Sure, I bet they'll add some better games that take advantage of it, but I wonder if anyone recalls the TiltPak on the N64? It effectively did the same thing. But it worked on many games. What can you think of other than a racing game that will be impacted much by Sixaxis? I can't really think of anything.

To sum it up, if I had $700 to blow on ONLY Playstation things and didn't own either a PS2 or PS3, I would rather spend $150 for a Platinum PS2 and spend the other $550 on games/accessories. It's gonna take a while to convince me that this thing is really worth $600. I still haven't found a reason to buy an XBox 360 either. I'm waiting on a Wii myself. (And, no. This isn't a fanboy troll attempt. The Wii is the only system with heart left. Oh, and you guys who said Twilight Princess is the only Wii launch title, you forgot RED STEEL!!!)

For those people that can't live without MGS and FF, getting a PS3 down the road makes sense. Personaly, I prefer walking into the room shooting (Halo), then sneaking up behind people (MGS).

What I can't understand are the average gamers that plan to buy a PS3 just to play Madden. I don't see the point in paying $500-$600 to play Madden on PS3, when you can play it on the 360 for as little as $300 and with no difference in graphics or gameplay.

@31: "WiiStation 3 ftw!"

Nice phrase, are you kidding me?

@Joe SMith

Bravo, well said. My sentiments exactly.

hm...... every one seems to have there share of disses ont he ps3. people say they coppied off the wii with there motionsense, but if the 360 came out with a motionsense controller would they be considered a copy of ? It's al about how you think about something and your way of thinking. Alot of systems of bad starts on launch dates. I myslef have a ds and it has it problem but i have never seen any one say any thing about that? Either alot of people are byest or im just smart beyond humination. The wii right now has it's advantages with there low prices but there run won't last long. As soon as ps3 make is adaptations and produces more games this will be another story. I predict by March every one will have a different opinion.

XBOX MUTHA*****!!!!!!!!!

same said for the Wii

Wow, Sony hyped a console for a year in an attempt to kill the momentum of a competitor console and then underdelivered? It's almost as if we've seen something like this before...hmm...when was that?

Oh, that's right, the "real-time Toy Story" Emotion Engine. If you got fooled last time, well, everyone gets one. If you got fooled this time, you're just a dupe.

And seriously, Sony fanboys, all this "but the XBox had a year's lead" whinging just makes your system of choice look lamer. What happened to all the "PS3 is three times better than 360"? Is it MS's fault that Sony blew their launch window multiple times, or that they couldn't solve basic video connectivity problems before they shipped?

The 360 might have melted itself, but at least gamers got to see what HD was about before they had to replace their systems. I feel bad for the guys who waited in line and are sucking on RFoM in 480p. True HD!

funny about the 'I am 21 and been playing since NES'
I am 35 and been playing since I had quarters and could walk to an asteriod machine. You all don't know pain like the Atari 2600 release of PacMan.. nearly killed the industry until Nintendo picked up the torch.
I wasn't a big Nintendo fan but respected them while I went on to computer games and then playstation 1 & 2.
Now we have the magical DS. I still say that this Christmas will belong to the DS. Don't let these console wars take away from the best gaming machine we have seen in a long long time...

And remember Nintendo is only a game company. You have to respect that as a gamer. Sony & MS do not have to care. Long live Nintendo and if you want 'more mature games' play them on your PC or fire up the PS2

If you just had the DS for the 'gotta have what's new and cool' and grabbed all those discounted PS2 titles for bang for buck, you would have a great holiday season without ANY problems with new consoles...

Oh the bickering. Will it never end.
Whatever...its hopeless to try to stop the constant bickering between fanboys.

Anywho, I'm just glad to hear a very honest opinion that seems rather devoid of bias, and from someone who doesn't get all twitterpated every time they see a load of miscellaneous tech specs.

Most articles about the PS3, if they have had anything negative to say, have been pure speculation or outright Sony-bashing. It is nice to see someone sit back, play the games, play around with the online, and demand MORE (because, frankly, we should demand more - we're paying for it).

As for my opinion:
Yes, the PS3 just released and the 360 has a year head start but, hell, that is Sony's fault (hey, remember when they were goin to release in the Spring...and remember when they were going to have substabtial amounts of units). I'm not going to sit here and go "oh, its ok if your basic features are behind the competition - you came a year late, feel free to catch up"

No. The PS3 isn't a 3rd grader who missed a week of class because he was sick. We as consumers are not obligated to let the PS3 catch up - it should have been doing that all year while the 360 sat on the market.

You do not compare the PS3 with the 360 a year ago - you compare them now. And right now, I, for one, demand more and better than what they are giving.

I know its cliche by now, but for 600$ (hey, or more if you bought yours on eBay, kids) Sony should have had their shit together from day 1 (last friday). And sure, they will release updates and make fixes. That's fine. But they better do it quick because they are still a year behind their main competition - competition that is not content to stand still while they catch up.

The 360 is a good console, the PS3 is a good console and the Wii is a good console. Each has features which are better than the other; none are perfect, none are useless and they'll all evolve over time thanks to the pressure placed on the manufacturers by the competitive market.

"Won't somebody PLEASE think of the gaming?"

"Recalcitrant? Looks like someone had a little too much fun with the thesaurus."

The guy is a writer for the New York Times, knowing a high level of English and using it correctly is his job. Get a clue.

"56. Like it or not, Sony -- not anyone else -- drove the hype machine on the PS3 to extraordinary levels while belittling the competition (anyone remember that "Xbox 1.5" crap they were slinging?). They set themselves up as the gods of the game business that no one could compete with. They quoted inflated and selective stats to make the box sound awesomely powerful -- to the point that even when faced with the reality, apologists still think it blows the Xbox out of the water in terms of raw horsepower. This was supposed to revolutionize how we played games, it was 4D, it was going to enable new experiences unlike anything that went before. This was supposed to be the machine it was worth working overtime to save for.

Given all that, for it to come out and not be competitive with a less expensive system that has a cleaner user experience and better games is a complete embarrasment. Sony did not give themselves the luxury of coming out broken and gradually getting up to speed.

They made huge promises and haven't delivered on any of them."

Thank you. Its sad that some people still fail to see this, even after the same sort of hype/letdown with the PS2...

After reading all these comments, all I can say is there are a lot of PS3 fanboy denials around today. The PS3 is an unfortunate step for Sony. They will never recoup the costs for the PS3. Blu-Ray will drag it and Sony into the ground. Check out reviews of Blu-Ray compared to HD-DVD players. Blu-Ray is sucking big time there too. Slow, poor quality, bad menus, etc etc. PS3 being the same should not suprise anyone. Expect PS2 sales to remain strong over the next 2 years at least, if not pick up in that time due to PS3 problems continuing.

Wiistation 3?

I'm confused.

I thought your multi threading-high definition-media hub-blueray-mp3 playing uber leet console did everything?

Why would you need to piggyback off the Wii?

61. Either alot of people are byest or im just smart beyond humination.

Something tells me you aren't "just smart beyond humination."

Will system wars ever end?

Atari 800XL (more horsepower) vs. C64 (more and better games) -> C64 sold more units.

Atari ST (more horsepower) vs. Amiga (more and better games) -> Amiga sold more units.

SEGA Gamegear (more horsepower) vs. Gameboy (more and better games) -> Gameboy sold more units.

XBOX (more horsepower) vs. PS2 (more and argueably better games) -> PS2 sold more units.

Do you see a pattern here? :-) Let the games decide... it's not the hardware or the user Interface that makes or breaks a console.

Ok I have a PS3 and it is a ok bluray player. It has a nice picture on the movies and runs in near silence. Resistance is ok. Nothing I have not played a 1000 times before on the 360 or ever old xbox.
I think as things stand right now the 360 is a far better system. The hddvd add on works so much better than my Toshiba HDdvd player and really doesnt cost that much.

I decided to keep my PS3 after the after market died so quickly. Its not great but its not bad either. Now why Sony didnt learn from MS's mistakes and add background downloads and the other issues that have been discussed from the start on the PS3 is beyound me. If MS does not update its system for the next year them maybe PS3 will be on equal footing this time next year, but I somehow dout that will happen.

Stebo

In your last three examples the console that came out first won... so 360 FTW then?

Where to start? Let's get the obligatory anti-Sony Joystiq bias out of the way. Interesting how Joystiq points out the negatives? Check. Done. Okay, aside from that ...

It makes perfect sense that the launch lineup is weak. They all were weak. They all have been weak since the first freakin' consoles ever existed. Can we PLEASE move on from such blatant rhetoric on what a weak launch line up means? Resistance is pretty damn good and a lot of much better games are coming soon. 'Nuff said. If you take the time to notice, you'll see the 360 has maybe 2 or 3 must-have titles. The Wii has 1.

Also, it's important to note that Sony will be working around the clock to regularly improve the PS3's firmware with a better and more comprehensive experience. Calm down, enjoy what's here today, and smile about what is to come.

To me (and I don't claim this to be everyone's priority) but the Wii is not an option because it's not HD. When people talk about the Wii it just doesn't matter to me because I can't watch HD movies on it and I can't play great looking HD games. Sure the Wii may be fun, but so is my PS2 ... and it costs half as much as a Wii and is technically almost identical.

"The man wrote a review about his "personal" account. His statements should hold no more value than someone you pass on the street."

Well there is one pretty big difference - his "personal" account was published in the NY Times which is read and respected by thousands (millions?) of readers. While you may have found it laughable (please tell us why...), many others who do not follow gaming blogs will rightfully see it as an informed opinion.

-> 74

I dunno... the 360 had a head start, the PS3 will have some great momentum through brand loyalty and the Wii has the novelty factor. I think it will be a closer race this time around... my educated guess would be: PS3: 40 % market share, 360 and Wii both at 30 % in 3 years (PS3 might win through its fanbase and established and exclusive japanese franchises like MGS or GT).

Btw, i don't own any of those next gen consoles and don't plan to buy one in the next year or so. But I enjoyed every minute with my PS1, N64 and Xbox. With no preference for any manufacturer I can just relax, let the fanboys fight it out and enjoy the show :-)

PS: Sorry for the double post - hit the wrong button...

lol, irony.

The NY Times isn't that great.

"lol, irony.
The NY Times isn't that great."

Please tell us which daily newspapers you consider to be superior (more relevant, more accurate, more subjective, whatever) to the New York Times.

I'd reckon there aren't more than five or six of them in the entire world.

For those of you wanting to know, Seth Schiesel did review the 360 right after it came out. If I remember correctly, the overall tone of the review was pretty favorable. Also, give Schiesel a break. Along with Dean from the San Jose Mecury News (assuming he survived the layoffs) he's one of the non-gaming-industry press's most credible writers. He does good work, and he knows his stuff. Don't accuse him of just cribbing from other sources unless you have proof.

And to the person who dreamed up the scenario where his editor told him to say something negative, you obviously been watching too many newspaper movies and not actually talking to anyone who works at one.

Hmm, The way I see it is xbox 360 wasted its year long head start. They had a full year to take control and they release less than a handful of good-to-great games. Arguably their best game, dropped a couple of weeks before the ps3. A year long head start to only give me dead rising and gears of war... It makes me glad I havn't bought any of the nexgen systems yet. (Well, maybe a 360 soon if I can get a nice holiday deal) The Wii offers nothing so far (Zelda doesn't count because Its a gamecube game with tacked on motion controls, not to mention it comes out for the gamecube in a few weeks) and, depending on your style taste, all the PS3 offers is RFOM or nothing.

Looking to the future, alot of great games are coming for all the systems. RE5, Metroid, SSBB, MGS4, FFXIII, Assassin's Creed. But those 6 titles won't be the determining factor, specially not RE5 and AC since they will be cross platform anyways. It'll be the games that come between them that will be the determining factor. If the PS3 can pull a PS2 and have great games inbetween their Killer Apps, then the PS3 will be very successful. If the Wii can pull a DS and have great releases inbetween their Killer Apps, then no one will care about the so-called failure that is the Gamecube. If the Xbox 360 can release more great games like dead rising and gears of war, it'll prove to be a worthy purchase by far.

Didn't I just see a lot of people claiming that the NY Daily news was a shitty paper after they dissed Sony and how much more credible and sophisticated the NY Times was ?

And now this....


You can't have it both ways fanboys.

"Like it or not, Sony -- not anyone else -- drove the hype machine on the PS3 to extraordinary levels while belittling the competition (anyone remember that "Xbox 1.5" crap they were slinging?). They set themselves up as the gods of the game business that no one could compete with. They quoted inflated and selective stats to make the box sound awesomely powerful -- to the point that even when faced with the reality, apologists still think it blows the Xbox out of the water in terms of raw horsepower. This was supposed to revolutionize how we played games, it was 4D, it was going to enable new experiences unlike anything that went before. This was supposed to be the machine it was worth working overtime to save for.

Given all that, for it to come out and not be competitive with a less expensive system that has a cleaner user experience and better games is a complete embarrasment. Sony did not give themselves the luxury of coming out broken and gradually getting up to speed.

They made huge promises and haven't delivered on any of them."


You believed them? That's your own fault.
I didnt know anyone believed hype from ANY company on ANY product. /shrug

Having used both the PS3 and 360 user interface, the PS3s is easily cleaner and more user friendly. I had to stop and stare at the 360s just to figure out what was what, the PS3 i hooked up and the icons make sense as opposed to vertical text "blades."

Me: The Wii "isn't that great either."

Being poor, I can't have any of thse consoles. But here's an outsider's perspective.

I personally loved the PS2. The games were usually much better, and titles like Shadow of the Colossus, Snake Eater, GTA: SA, Katamari Damaci, and so many others were the only things that interested me in consoles (I dump what money I have into my computer).

As is, I would not buy any of them. If I were a rich man, I'd buy a PS3 a year or two down the road, when the really good things start coming out. I love the Wii, but I feel that the neat little thing will be doomed to the kiddiness that really doesn't interest me, and being that I'm not much of a Halo fan, I won't buy the 360 solely for (the potentially PC-bound) Gears of War.

Also, as an english major, I use the word "recalcitrant" on an almost daily basis. If the New York Times mystifies you with its arcane verbiage, then you'd best stick to USA Today.

>80: "lol, irony. The NY Times isn't that great."

Good lord, now the national newspaper of record is under attack because they call the PS3 "so so" in what is a fairly decent review? Like any organization, they err now and again but you'll be hard pressed to find a better daily newspaper anywhere in the world and certainly in the USA.

Then again, maybe you're right, I will wait for the suburban Chicago Daily Herald to come out with its review. And then if we're not happy with that, there is always the Traverse City Record-Eagle. And if THEY don't like the PS3, I'll pay Globe, Arizona's SilverBelt to write a good review.

I think the Weekly World News is the only worthwhile publication left in this country. They'd do a fair review of this thing.

BTW, since sarcasm doesn't travel over the internet...I'm being sarcastic.

sorry, the whole "it just launched/give it more time" excuse and trying to make us remember how this is not to different then the 360 launch makes NO senese. They delayed the console for atealst 6 months and oinly due to blu ray diodes. Ther fore, they ahve 6 more months to poish everything else - and still the out of box experience is paled to the out of box 360 experince of a year ago -a console which was deemed to be "rushed."

Sorry, this is unacceptalble - Sony had lots of time to smooth everything over and yet its THEIR console that comes across as "rushed" and "not ready" when it DOES come out a year later.

Oh I forogt, we have to pardon and axcuse sony for whatever they do - including the bs lies...

Except that Gears of War owns Res:FOM in pretty much everway.

Average review score of REs is like 88 or 89 and noone is "amazed" but it; Geears is averageing 95 and i heard plenty say "game of the year"

(one moight also point aht while the Zelda game is getting similarly great - if not flightly better - review scores, noone is saying "game of the year" - interesting, huh?)

LEt me also clear up somethings said aboe:

Gears is not just "slighty prettier" then Resistance - its heads and shoulds above it, and unless you have palyed both like me, you cant object. GeOw on EVERY level is better then Resistance. END OF STORY!

Also - MS has not wasted their year long headstart. The have over 100 games out of the system, more then jus tone worthwhile game - and they have atleast 7mm consoles SOLD. They also have a bunhc of AAA-AAAA titles coming out this winter/early 2007 and in the spring. THEY ARE SITTING PRETTY!

One more thing - noone here has an opinion of the ps3 or its launhc or of sony that isnt 100% deserved and earned. what ISNT deserved and earned is your loyalty and apologising and excusing for them.

"(one moight also point aht while the Zelda game is getting similarly great - if not flightly better - review scores, noone is saying "game of the year" - interesting, huh?)"

Oh, Zelda's totally shaping up to be Game of the Year...unfortunately, that year is 2004.