Rumorong: Warhawk back to being downloadable title

no more then 35 would be great

It's sad they threw the game around so much and it became a multiplayerdownload. With this, Motorstorm, and Resistance, Sony has REALLy rushed their developers and pushed out games FAR to quickly.

Yeah, they need games FAST, but they're not finished products. Sony shouldve waited another year to release the ps3, with killer games and a more complete online setup. Oh, and rumble in the controllers.

They wouldve gained MUCH more respect from gamers if they simply didnt rush everything.

This still seems odd to me based on the trailers... it looks like it will either be a huge download or not have very many levels. (Maybe you download levels individually?)

Or maybe they just have some magic to make it all not take a lot of space. But I doubt it.

@KC: Dude. Compared to the PS2 launch, this one is amazing. There are actually some good games, and seeing the platform evolve is actually kinda neat.

You can wait and wait and wait until you have everything, but by then you're going to be too late to market. The PS3 is a solid console: they have the hardware and decent software; there haven't been any of the critical bugs that have plagued other consoles (PS2's Disc Read Error, 360's fire-starting power bricks, Wii's bricked consoles).

All three consoles come down to one thing: who can ramp up the game library and keep people's interest. With Home, LBP, stuff like Ratchet and quite a few others we're starting to see that are out later this year, the PS3 is showing a lot more promise than the PS2 did at this point in its lifecycle. (ICO was the only real game worth playing in the PS2's first year, and it came late; back then we only had MGS2 to look forward to and some rumblings from Square. There were no Jak, Ratchet, Devil May Cry, and similar franchises that have since developed.)

you ever think EA would make its own console, it uses its own servers, has the whole sports genre locked up, sims, nfs, and alot of other stuff. just doesnt make sense to me, it wouldnt be healthy for the industry , but it seems lucrative to ea,

I think the sweet spot for warhawk's price would be $20-30. On exclusives, We are starting to see MS's and Sony's first/second party development get better.

So far we have seen SotC, Gow, and Heavenly Sword. What else does Sony's First/Second party have in store for us?

On the MS side we have seen, Halo and Crackdown, how much longer til we see the next truly amazing offering from MS First/Second party devs? I'm guessing not much.

The war between MS and Sony this time around will be great for us gamers, giving us fantastic first/second party offerings regardless of your system choice.

But this game definitely makes sense as a downloadable title, especially since they compressed it down to a multiplayer funfest

Boo at Multiplayer Only games...

Well, I just hope Warhawk is 20 bucks. that'd be awesome.

Patrick, I've always felt EA is indeed planning to make their own console at some point. They're a HUGE gaming company, and if they keep buyin' other companies and publishing more and more games like they have been, they'll try to pull it off. They'll certainly have enough games and enough support from gamers.
Not me though, I despise EA. Though, there are a few titles such as Army of Two, Merc2, and Halflife2 that'll make me buy a game with their name on it :(

And oGMo, how in the world can you possibly say the ps3 is a solid system right now? The ONLY reason to buy one is if you want a cheaper bluray player. ANY real gamer knows its a hunk of junk for now. If you played one you'd know how unintuitive the entire thing is. Going online with it is a pain, and playing with others isn't nearly as efficiant as LIVE does it. There HAVE been critical bugs with its firware updates that have bricked systems as well as overheating problems. The only reason you dont hear about more of em is because not many people even own the console nor play it often. You're looking at games that wont be out till 2008, and you're counting HOME as being a killer app for it. Thats grasping straws. The ps3 wouldve been a lot better off in the eyes of the public if they waited. Yes, the longer they wait the longer the other consoles have time to sell, but the PR crap they've been under wouldnt happen if they got all thhe bugs out of their system.

I don't see how it can be downloadable only! According to Incognito it has at least 25 levels! Mega Download!

I could see this game being a download only, In the video I watched I think every single object was covered with the same ugly brown texture. HA! j/k but honestly, the original Warhawk was one of the first great Playstation games I played, and I'm sad to see this one isn't going to be anything like it. I mean I can understand leaving out the FMV with its awful, cheesy acting and sets. But so much footage I've seen has been ground missions, is there even much flying in this game anymore??

Taken from and IGN arcticle after visiting with Incognito about the game:

"This warfare will now take place across 25 different maps scattered across five separate worlds, each with their own environmental configurations."

This sounds like a huge download! I say Blu-Ray

@ KC... have you ever touched a PS3? what's hard about getting online? nice FUD

Yeah I've played one for quite awhile(and only ending up really enjoying VF5, but thats because I like the series).

The online is messy and communicating with friends over it is a hassle. Its no xboxlive thats for sure.

Anyway it does do its job, but not without its fare share of problems that ALL multiplayer internet services provide on PC games. Again, its not as good as LIVE.

I just feel that when buying a "top of the line" console, you should get everything top of the line. The ps3 is meant to change overtime with a multitude of firmware updates. Its a joke of a console right now, but at least it can be improved.

I personally dislike the thought of my gaming consoles being so PC like, with patches for half-assed gamesand firmware updates for pushed out to soon hardware.

Some may think of it all as a good thing they can fix it. I look at it as a rushed product. I simply dont like to settle for less.

but KC by that reasoning NONE of the systems are good because they've ALL had firmware updates or have you forgotten all the expanding the 360 has done with firmware updates since its launch? Same with the Wii and if the rumors of an upgraded 360 are true (HDMI, bigger harddrive, etc)... how does that not make the system a "rushed" out hardware system?

and as for the online being messy...well i've never had a problem with it, yeah its no live, but live has had what? 4 or 5 years to get to where its at?

I still find both services useful and none are any harder than the other to get online and game (Except for the Wii at this point). The only problem that comes into effect is if you want to specifically game with someone on your friends list right away which the 360 excels at but even then half the itme i personally dont get to play with my live friends anyway so its of no big concern to me right off the bat.

But then thats a personal thing and doesnt hold true for everyone.

"but KC by that reasoning NONE of the systems are good because they've ALL had firmware updates or have you forgotten all the expanding the 360 has done with firmware updates since its launch"

Hell yeah, and I HATE it. I do not like where this generation of consoles is headed. Only the Wii is staying as close to the older consoles as possible, and for that, I thank Nintendo for staying true to the hardcore CONSOLE gamer.

I've always disliked playing games on the PC. Disliked mouse and keyboard gaming, disliked online gaming, disliked patches, disliked mods. I like to play videogames. Hell, I LOVE to play videogames, especially with my brothers and friends. I do not like being hassled with operating systems that screw up a million different ways.

Heres the BIGGEST problem. I dislike playing games online. Its a hassle to get internet connections up and running, lag during play is one of the WORST concepts in games EVER, and playing with strangers over an online connection makes me feel like I'm playing the computer. These new consoles, the ps3, and 360, are using their hardware raw power to run games in HD and widescreen. Thats great for the videophile gamers. But the real hardcore gamers do not want that. The real hardcore gamers can go back to play StreetFighter2 in the arcade and enjoy it just as much as ever.
I also dislike buying games ONLINE that dont give me a box, manuel, or anything! I'm somewhat of a game collector. The fact that gaming is moving towards this virtual market bothers me. I like my shelves of games. I cant picture not owning them.

This new generation is catoring to a type of gamer that wants pretty pictures and to sit at home and not socialize. I think its terrible. However, it seems to be mostly the USA gamer thats becoming like this.

Maybe I should go live in Japan. They seem to have my same gaming tastes. Fun, simple, arcade style games. Hell, even their arcade scene is still rocking. I want that in the states.

Ok, I've gone off on quite the tangent.

Major point of this, I'm not fond of PC games. And that exactly what the majority of 360 and ps3 games are feeling like right now.
I'm aware that all consoles are really just simplistic computers, but they do their job well. The more crap you pack into the box doesnt make it better. The online for ps3 is not good right now. 360 xboxLIVE is a VERY nice system to play on. Simple, effective, rarely any screwups.

Already with my friends ps3, we've had numerous disconnects(yeah its the games server or something, but not his online connection as it works flawlessly for his 360 and his WoW time), we've had times where we couldnt hear anyone over mics, we've had random drops, we've had TONS of lag, its not there yet.

At the very least, it can improve since it is afterall, a damn PC at heart.

OK KC seeing that you "played one for quite awhile" I think its safe to assume that you don’t own a ps3 but own an XBox360. So I figured id clue you in about the ps3 a little.

I would first like to say that I own both an XBox360 and a PS3. I like my Xbox games much better then my ps3 games by far. But the ps3 is a much better system then the Xbox, am sorry.

Ok so now to my problems with your last post...

First: "The online is messy and communicating with friends over it is a hassle."

Highly disagree, what’s messy and a hassle about clicking on someone’s name and typing a message or creating a video chat room with them.

Second: " I just feel that when buying a "top of the line" console, you should get everything top of the line. The ps3 is meant to change overtime... but at least it can be improved"

There’s nothing "top of the line" about a standard DVD drive or a S-Video/RCA output. (XBox360) Which by the way were on the PS2 and Xbox.

I’m not sure where you’re going by implying that improvements and updates are a bad thing for the ps3. In the world of gaming things are changing all the time, wouldn't you want a system that can change with it?

Third: "I personally dislike the thought of my gaming consoles being so PC like..."

I hate to break it to you buddy but all gaming consoles are "PC like". Both have processors, hard drives, memory, graphic cards and so on. Even the Atari was "PC like".

Lastly: "Some may think of it all as a good thing they can fix it. I look at it as a rushed product. I simply don’t like to settle for less."

Here I agree with you (slightly) it was rushed, not question about it. Xbox was getting a too strong of a grip on the new system market so Sony crossed their fingers and went to market.

But!!! (There’s always a but) "I simply don’t like to settle for less."
I’m sorry KC but you did settle for less.

With no true Hi-Def, even with the HD-DVD, RCA and S-Video cant handle true Hi-Def im sorry, you need HDMI for that. And as for the all knowing and powerful "LIVE" I used to pay for it until I came to realization that it's just an extended buddy list, all games have a buddy list. So way pay for an Xbox buddy list?


Just because the Honda Civic is cheaper then a Ferrari doesn't mean its better. I’m not saying that the Xbox is that far off from the PS3, but when people try to compare XBox360 to PS3 they forget they are comparing a new system to a system that’s been out for over a year.

Mrspunk, first off, these are all my opinions, so arguing about em isnt going to change my mind.
But regarding the points made,

"First: "The online is messy and communicating with friends over it is a hassle."
Highly disagree, what’s messy and a hassle about clicking on someone’s name and typing a message or creating a video chat room with them"
-Read my second post about dropping from matches, not hearing people over the mic, and so forth. I've had quite a different experience than you.

"Second: " I just feel that when buying a "top of the line" console, you should get everything top of the line. The ps3 is meant to change overtime... but at least it can be improved"
There’s nothing "top of the line" about a standard DVD drive or a S-Video/RCA output. (XBox360) Which by the way were on the PS2 and Xbox"
-I said "top of the line" because thats what Sony is touting their console as. It isnt. It has more faults than other consoles right now. I'm a hardcore GAMER, I play GAMES, the ps3 isnt doing it. I can care less about disc drives and whatnot. In my opinion, the SNES and Dreamcast are more top of the line systems as ps3 and 360 are.

"Third: "I personally dislike the thought of my gaming consoles being so PC like..."
I hate to break it to you buddy but all gaming consoles are "PC like". Both have processors, hard drives, memory, graphic cards and so on. Even the Atari was "PC like"."
-Again, read my other post. I know they're PCs. But with older consoles that did their specific task, to play videogames. Its not like that anymore.


"But!!! (There’s always a but) "I simply don’t like to settle for less."
I’m sorry KC but you did settle for less."

Just because your opinion of whats less is no "true HD" and paying for buddylists, doesnt mean thats what my opinion on whats less is.

I feel that paying 600 bucks for a console that doesnt play any good games(except some old ps1 and ps2 titles) and has a shoddy online, is what makes the ps3 a poor choice.
Gamers who hype the ps3 and pretend its the best console ever are doing this to justify their purchase.
Its as simple as that.

And yes, I'm being a bit harsh, but seriously this topic pisses me off.

Thats what got me ranting.

I play multiplayer games, lots of em. I dont however like playing em online. If Warhawk is an online only mulitplayer downloadable game, well, thats just about the WORST kind of game I can think of.

Online = hassles with connections. Lag. Droppers. Online multiplayer is second fiddle to multiplayer with friends in the same room.
Downloadable = putting the game on my hardrive. No hard copy. Just money to play a game online. Doesnt make me feel like I own it.

Warhawk was a cool ps1 game. This downloadable Warhawk, is turing into something I despise.

@KC: You pretty much don't know what you're talking about. Using "you're not a real gamer if..." is proof of nothing.

The PS3 is solid hardware. It does not suffer from hardware flaws, it's a beautiful configuration and has pretty much every feature you could possibly hope for in such a thing: next-gen media, built-in mass storage, built-in portable media readers for EVERY major type of flash card (whoda thunkit from Sony), *gigabit* ethernet, wifi, bluetooth, HDMI, optical audio, yadda. The works. It even looks cool. And you can install an Linux on it *out of the box*. It has not suffered from overheating (unless you stick it in a closed box), disc read failures, bricked consoles, or *any* general report of failure of any kind. Yeah... you want all that, they're going to charge you a price tag that matches, but you're getting what you paid for.

Games? Not a huge library right now (not counting BC). Looking back at the PS2 and PS1 (and 360, Wii, Cube, and N64), this is par for course... it hasn't even been out 6 months yet. But it does have *some*, and many are solid titles. Far more than what the PS2 had for the first year. The PS3, again, has been out for FOUR MONTHS.

The Wii has... what? Zelda? Elebits? What would it have if Nintendo hadn't gutted their previous console, essentially screwing over their Cube customers, and released Zelda and Super Paper Mario as Wii games? We'd still be waiting for Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3. What other serious, non-party games does it have scheduled for the next year? I'm a gamer: I don't care about Wii Sports. When I want to play sports, I go outside and play them.

The 360? What does it have? Gears of War? Still waiting for Halo 3? Blue Dragon? It's been out over a year now.

People who pretend the PS3 is a shoddy console because they can't afford $500 are merely rationalizing their position.

@KC: You pretty much don't know what you're talking about. Using "you're not a real gamer if..." is proof of nothing.

The PS3 is solid hardware. It does not suffer from hardware flaws, it's a beautiful configuration and has pretty much every feature you could possibly hope for in such a thing: next-gen media, built-in mass storage, built-in portable media readers for EVERY major type of flash card (whoda thunkit from Sony), *gigabit* ethernet, wifi, bluetooth, HDMI, optical audio, yadda. The works. It even looks cool. And you can install an Linux on it *out of the box*. It has not suffered from overheating (unless you stick it in a closed box), disc read failures, bricked consoles, or *any* general report of failure of any kind. Yeah... you want all that, they're going to charge you a price tag that matches, but you're getting what you paid for.

Games? Not a huge library right now (not counting BC). Looking back at the PS2 and PS1 (and 360, Wii, Cube, and N64), this is par for course... it hasn't even been out 6 months yet. But it does have *some*, and many are solid titles. Far more than what the PS2 had for the first year. The PS3, again, has been out for FOUR MONTHS.

The Wii has... what? Zelda? Elebits? What would it have if Nintendo hadn't gutted their previous console, essentially screwing over their Cube customers, and released Zelda and Super Paper Mario as Wii games? We'd still be waiting for Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3. What other serious, non-party games does it have scheduled for the next year? I'm a gamer: I don't care about Wii Sports. When I want to play sports, I go outside and play them.

The 360? What does it have? Gears of War? Still waiting for Halo 3? Blue Dragon? It's been out over a year now.

People who pretend the PS3 is a shoddy console because they can't afford $500 are merely rationalizing their position.

lol, oGMo. You are a huge fanboy ya know that?
It does suffer from hardware flaws, you're being blinded by fanboyism. You have absolutely no idea what its like to be a hardcore gamer in this day and age.
Companies shoving needless crap in their products isn't what a gamer wants.

Just because you could barely afford to spend 500 dollars on your ps3 doesnt mean you need to convince the world you made the right choice. I could go buy a ps3 anytime I want. They're everywhere afterall :P

Seriously dude, I must've hit a soft spot on ya, because noone in their right mind would try to defend something they apparantly enjoy unless you were having doubts about your purchase.
Have fun with your nongaming console.

I'm still playing all the games I own on Wii, DS, psp, 360, ps2, dreamcast, and saturn to ever bother with a half assed ps3.

@KC: Muahaha. I love it when people call me a Sony fanboy. You know where my PS3 is sitting? Under the shelf with the PS2 and Cube. Which is under the shelf with the Dreamcast and N64. Which is under the shelf with the SNES and NES---the same NES I had as a kid, when it was new. Which is next to the shelf with my DS Lite, GBA, 2x GBA SP, GBC, and yes, PSP. This is across from the shelf with RIFTS, D&D 3.5E, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, and GURPS.

I've got Startropics in my NES right now, Chibi Robo in the Cube, DDR in the PS2, and Okami in the PS3. What's in *your* NES right now?

I'm a gamer. I like games. If it's got dice, cards, a controller, or just some rules, I'll try it out. I don't claim any tags; if you "hardcore" gamers want to play Wii Sports and Halo, you go right ahead. They're neat. But I'd rather be playing Shin Megami Tensei.

If thats the case oGMo then why do you defend the ps3?

@oGMo:
If the PS3 is so great, like you say it is, then why did you say that Okami (a PS2 game) is in your PS3 right now? Nothing better to put in there?

If thats the case oGMo then why do you defend the ps3 while knocking the 360 and Wii? You say all those gamers have to look forward to is Halo and Mario/Metroid. You couldnt be more wrong.

You come off more as a pack rat than anything else, buying everything you can pretending not to be biased. But deep down you still are. Your comments make that apparent.

How many of those games are you even playing through? Using your ps3 to play Okami instead of the ps2? Ok, you use that powerbrick you decided to buy just for the hell of it.
I for one like to purchase games i'll get a use out of.

Anyway, I'm not trying to sway anyones opinion about the ps3. I'm merely stating mine. The games are being rushed out to it, becoming unfinished, and turning into downloadable multiplayer only games.

That doesnt make a good console in ANY real gamers eye.

"I dislike playing games online. Its a hassle to get internet connections up and running, lag during play is one of the WORST concepts in games EVER..." - KC

KC, I understand when you say you don't like playing games online... But the reasons you cite are pretty unique to you at this point in time - I rarely have problems with getting 'internet connections up and running,' and lag is not a constant; yes it occasionally happens but is often corrected with an re-host or losing the low-speed culprit... Which (I respectfully offer up, in no judgement of you or your character) might be you or your connection in your situation.Not trying to flame on you but it might explain the two first reasons you claim why you don't like online play. Perhaps online play just isn't in the cards for you, but online is just about the only way I play anymore, with friends on xbox LIVE.

You do mention VF5, a fighting game, a genre that has little leeway for even the slightest lag. This might explain your displeasure a little bit as well.

But then someone or something got under your skin, and you got riled up and went here:

"It does suffer from hardware flaws, you're being blinded by fanboyism. You have absolutely no idea what its like to be a hardcore gamer in this day and age.
Companies shoving needless crap in their products isn't what a gamer wants.

Just because you could barely afford to spend 500 dollars on your ps3 doesnt mean you need to convince the world you made the right choice. I could go buy a ps3 anytime I want. They're everywhere afterall :P

Seriously dude, I must've hit a soft spot on ya, because noone in their right mind would try to defend something they apparantly enjoy unless you were having doubts about your purchase.
Have fun with your nongaming console." - KC

You're coming off like a dick with all that. Can I turn that back on you? No one in their right mind would attack another gamer for something they apparently enjoy unless you just like reading your own smarmy insults on something you're not planning on buying anyway... So why should it matter?

I like my Wii, my PS3, but I play my 360 the most of any of them right now, Wii least of all, unless someone hasn't seen one before and has heard about 'Bowling' on it, then I turn it on. I like all the systems. I can't understand why people get so mad about all of this - just buy what you want and enjoy it. No big thing.

I defend the PS3 too, because I think it has a lot going for it, it IS well made, and it seems to be getting better every week right now. But the point I want to make, the point I hope you read, is this:

Someone ELSE not liking the PS3 doesn't make ME a fanboy for liking it, it makes THEM a fanboy - for the other systems.

Just sayin'.

Ah. I think the problem is that you refuse to even consider the PS3; it is "shoddy" and if anyone says anything good, they're a paid shill or fanboy. It can be no other way.

Except I break this assertion.

Set aside for a moment your feelings that the PS3 *must* absolutely be bad, and just consider for a moment. (Don't worry, you don't have to tell anyone that you really did this.) Why, specifically, really, have you personally experienced it being bad? You have seen some games get disconnected, which is a common symptom of the network, yet cite WoW... which in its infancy had *horrendous* connectivity and maintenance problems, often spanning *days* of downtime.

Consider that maybe, actually, the PS3 has something to offer: it has the hardware, it has the game developers, and it comes from a company with two prior consoles delivering libraries counted in the *thousands*. Many top franchises (Ratchet and Clank, Virtua Fighter, Turok, Burnout, Warhawk, Unreal Tournament, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, Killzone.. just reading down the IGN list for stuff that pops out) and big-name developers (Sega, Capcom, Konami, Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Ubisoft.. yeah there's some crossover) have new releases scheduled for THIS YEAR. That's within the *first* generation. Is it SO HARD to understand why this *might* just be a platform with potential? Why even Penny Arcade has picked them up, despite prior protests over the price?

Yeah, so it costs a lot. So don't get one yet. (Yes, I said it: you can wait.) Big deal: there are tons of games on last-gen platforms that are worth playing far more than anything the Wii *or* PS3 have to offer right now (and yes, Zelda is still a last-gen game).

You don't have to hate it just because you don't want one right now. I don't have a Wii, but I don't hate the Wii. I'm just waiting until a few more games come out (Super Paper Mario, for instance), and I've finished some I'm working on (Okami!).

I defend the PS3 because few other people are stepping up to the plate. (Oh the irony... how can the PS3 be the underdog? That hurts my mind.) It's got a lot of potential, and it'd be a shame if that went to waste. And if I needed other people to validate my opinions and choices, I'd just get whatever the popular item-du-jour was and pretend to be happy.

ill trooper you make very valid points.

"Someone ELSE not liking the PS3 doesn't make ME a fanboy for liking it, it makes THEM a fanboy - for the other systems."

Thats the total truth to it. It's when people(like oGMo) praise the ps3 and knock the other consoles, it makes me call out the name "fanboy". Its some primal gamer urge that makes me do it, mainly because I dont understand the appeal for a ps3 from a gamers standpoint. Especially when there are so many videogames on the market.

For the first time in my years buying videogames, one console and one company has completely made me not want to buy their product. That is Sony and the ps3. To me, its obvious why its not a good buy right now.
I fully intend to get one, as I end up buying every console anyway. But right now? Not for me.

I apologize for coming off like a dick.

I'm just posting my opinions about my hobby.

And yeah, I'm very picky about online gaming. Especially when it takes away my beloved splitscreen. It sucks when a game, COUGHmotorstormCOUGHwarhawk, takes away the ability to play with someone in the same room/household, short of buying two consoles and two copies of the game.

oGMo
"I defend the PS3 because few other people are stepping up to the plate."

Thats all I needed to read to understand. I too know the ps3 has potential. I'm personally waiting to see how DevilMayCry4 turns out and to see Zone of the Enders on it before I take the plunge.

It's still stuck in my head that the ps3 doesn't have single exclusive(short of VF5, but that'll be on 360), that makes it worth owning. And yeah I'm talking from a straight "buy vidoegame console to play videogames and nothing else" standpoint.

Potential abound, it's an exciting time to be a gamer. There are some thing I dont like about where the industry is headed, there are things I do like.

I apologize for sounding rash and coming off head strong.

We're all gamers here. It's what we're passionate about.

KC, I understand, it's become a pretty passionate hobby these days and Sony has come late to the party, with nothing really that great yet. It would be an amazing system, except for one thing: the 360. The Xbox 360 came out and is handling a lot of stuff better than the PS3 is.

The 360 has become AMAZING in it's first year, and it's likely the PS3 will get better too... I always like to look at the calander, and note that it only came out in Nevember, 4 months ago. So I give it some slack. But if we are having this same discussion one year from now, I can't say I'll care or defend it then.

"24. @oGMo:If the PS3 is so great, like you say it is, then why did you say that Okami (a PS2 game) is in your PS3 right now? Nothing better to put in there? Posted at 1:34AM on Mar 17th 2007 by BobbyBob"

One last thing on this, then I will let it lay... Nearly one year ago, I was only playing backward-compatible games on my 360 too - waiting for new games to come out. I still had to keep my Xbox connected to play Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon2, which were finally playable on the 360 many months after launch. G.R.A.W. finally came out at the start of March 2006. If you really want to go here, you also have to acknowledge that the PS3 has excellent compatibility with the PS2 library, definitely a higher percentage than the 360 had with the Xbox library. You can go down to the store and buy the best-rated game of the last few months, God of War II, and play it on your PS3. It depends if you consider that 'NOT USING' your PS3. I think it does count, if people are gonna count virtual console downloads on the Wii and 'Scramble,' etc. on the 360 as 'pluses.' Personally, I wish they had made GoW2 a PS3 game, but at least I can play it. Microsoft had people making two versions of games. So let that one go please. Much better focusing on criticizing the price, which IS a legitimate beef with the PS3... no debating that one.

@MrSpunk

You have been brainwashed by HDMI. Component cables are just as good.

@oGMo
Go to GameRankings to see what good games there are on 360. Wii's library is shoddy if you are more of a single player guy, and Super Paper Mario can't drop soon enough.

the PS3 ostensibly didn't come out in spring '06 (which it was designed to do, only 5 months after the 360) because of a problem getting enough blu-ray diodes.

so did all of sony's internal and external developers just stop their all their work until the blu-ray diodes came in? of course not, and thats why the PS3 only having being out for five months is the worst excuse to me.

Sony's platform development dept. just got caught with their pants down by the 360. Sony just threw the highest tech they could out the door, and hoped everything works out later. it had absolutely no real platform philosophy other than blu-ray which still hasn't been worth a lick to gamers. in fact they've gone against every stated game philopsophy they ever managed to think up on the spot.

playstation legacy - no longer 100% BC, rumble - last gen, until we settle and you have to buy a new controller, motion control is the future - warhawk now half a game over the network. free online - as long as the developers do it all themselves per each game. 1080p at 60fps on dual monitors - etc. etc. etc.


say what you will about the 360's powerbrick, launch games, component cables, or hard drive but it was a MATURE PLATFORM in november '05.

yes i'm aware the launch games weren't super amazing, (the majority certainly weren't ports though, and they were the first HD games you ever played on your TV) but the 360 was well thought out, designed, and implemented at launch as a next-generation PLATFORM.

HD, wireless, persistent unified online, and more importantly DEV SUPPORT, were all there in november 2005. i can't believe im defending microsoft, but props were props are due. their *game* philosophy was this is our next generation, lets not look back (BC) and come out right. it was a complete platform that playstation 3 is still scrambling to be a year and a half later (game 3.0?).

but background downloading didnt come until later some say, hard not to laugh at that comment because before xbox live you werent downloading much to your console at all. much less shifting through things to download to you console. but the red ring of death some will say, well it's happened to my buddies, and you know what, even after their fully reimbursed replacements came they were still inviting me from other games to play GRAW online, something the playstation 3 still can't do.

point is this:

you either do something first or do something better than your competition and in Sony's case they haven't come close to doing either this time around.

all we paid for were theoretical specs, acronyms (hey, lets play HDMI online, i love that game) and promises. promises Sony has broken and are far away on the horizon to fulfill.

yes Sony's game vision will someday get back to being fully focused on THIS generation and those 1st party studios and platform dev guys will finally catch up to and maybe even surpass that cheap (!!) white console that came out in 2005. but by that time, the playstation3 won't be $600 anymore.

save your money, potential isn't worth this much. pay for the reality, it will be cheaper, whether its 360 now or PS3 in 2008.




.

@Slaziman
"Component cables are just as good"
Thats must be why i CANT play games at 1080i on component, cause its just as good.