Stringer: Euro PlayStation 3 approaching 800,000 sold

By the time the PS3 reaches 50% market penetration the next Xbox will probably be out and maybe even cheaper than the PS3.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how this can be conceived as good news for the PS3. Surely, it's not "tanking" per se, but based on the fact that we know it sold well over 600,000 units in the first day alone, that means that sales since have been somewhat lackluster considering the fact that they are in plentiful stock. I think we all know how well the PS3 would have done here or in Japan if they were plentiful on launch day. Unfortunately, this likely means that they will decline even more in the coming months until Sony can release some real AAA titles come this fall. It seems that everyone who wanted a PS3 in Europe got one on the first day and since then they've been slowly walking out the door.

They already sold 5 in my shop! Wow.

[In one MediaMarkt in 100.000 big city [one of 2 places where you can buy PS3 in my city]

I really believe in that they "are closing to 800.000" - only ~300.000 left :)

"the next Xbox will probably be out and maybe even cheaper than the PS3."

Well that is microsoft's plans. Xbox 1 lasted BARELY 4 years before Microsoft gave you guys the finger, and bent you over and said " hurry buy the 360", so its only a matter of time before they do it again. the 360 has been out,hmm a year and a half, give or take a few months? that gives you guys only like less than 3 years to enjoy your sytem.

Historically, Sony has supported their systems for OVER 5 years, with the Playstation 1, lasting for about 11 years(Japan on December 3, 1994- March 23, 2006, Sony announced the end of production)Now that is loyalty.

Also, the PS1 continued to sell and even outsell, the ps2, about a year into the ps2's launch. Sounds very familiar.

Anywhoo, events of the past dont neccessarily project the future, it just gives us some sort of insight, but i do know this: Sony is in it for the long haul, Microsoft is in for the quick buck.

NOTE: My bro is a HUGE 360 fan, he gloats and praises his system, yet he only owns i think 4 games. PGR, Lost, Gears of War, Fight Night 3. (Please dont say Oblivion, or CoD, those games we have on our PCs, why? we can play CoD for FREE online ANYTIME we want, LOL)


Not much of a variety for being out one year and a half.

I only have 4 games for my 360 too. The 360 really isn't the best system for us casuals. I want a Wii but I can't seem to find one.

my damn bro has a wii also. but he only has two games for it, DBZ:Budokai 3 i think, and Zelda.

He's really not a "Nintendo"-guy, in that he bought the Wii on impulse. It was at the store, hype got a hold of him,he bought it lol

Same here, got my PS3, been trying to get my Wii ever since lol

For Ps3 i see my collection getting bigger than his real soon. Heavenly Sword, Lair would put me at 5 games. Currently i own resistance, FN:3, Motorstorm ( NEVER EVER thought i'd like a 'motocross' game).

jojo -

if you knew anything about the game industry, you'd know it's in any company's best interest to be no.1 and then stretch out the life of their console as much as they can.

unless you're Nintendo, launching consoles is massively expensive, and MS wouldn't gain anything by releasing a new platform so soon.

microsoft pulled out of xbox1 because it came too late in the generation cycle and couldn't grow against the already established Playstation.

Playstation 1 and 2 were 'supported' so long because when you're number 1, sustaining old hardware with millions of games is the most profitable thing you can do. its why you launch a console in the first place.

if MS has its way, the 360 platform will last as long as the PS2 did.


.

jojo29, the bottom line is: who wants a 5 year old system? You mention PC gaming - try buying a top-of-the-line PC, then gaming on it for 5 years. Still playing new games fluidly at native LCD resolution with eye candy after 5 years? I didn't think so.

The bottom line is that Sony's "5 year lifespan" doesn't make sense as technology marches ahead at its current frenetic pace. Consoles aren't upgradeable, but a slightly shorter release schedule is more advisable.

I won't go into why the Cell and Sony's split-RAM architecture was such a terrible choice (fast, but NOT for gaming purposes - Folding@Home is the best use for the PS3), but suffice to say that the 360 will scale much better on the far end of both products' lifespans.

Except they won't have the same lifespan. MS is playing it smart and laughing all the way to the bank; they know that their box will outlast the PS3 in its current form but because they released the 360 at a lower price point they can justify replacing it more often. Remember some basic math here: $400/4 years vs. $600/5 years ends up costing more over the course of 20 years for Sony's best than Microsoft's.

Microsoft will replace their console more often, but it will cost less in the long run and their hardware choices were far more enlightened than Sony's.

Your argument has no feet left to stand on, so my work here is done.

And as the time rolls by, analysts still seem to predict based simply off of the results of last generation. They all still seem to say PS3>360>Wii when all indications seem to go against that

Now, there's always the possibility that the PS3 could come back with some as-yet-unforeseen hit (from the little guys, like Little Big Planet, or a "non-game" like SingStar), and the small possibility of HOME hitting it big with the MySpace crowd, i don't see where the turnaround is coming

And that leads to something else, people claim that Nintendo isn't making enough Wiis, which isn't true, they've SOLD OUT 6.5 Million Wiis, more than what Sony's shipped so far. Now if Nintendo was producing at the same levels, but only selling similar numbers as the PS3, they would be making enough easily, they're simply not equipped to meet this level of demand...

jojo

So the number of games one person buys demonstrates how good or bad a system is. i have about 18 games (and they're all great) for the 360, so that must make it better than the other system.

@ Josh Warner

But that's the point of consoles, so that you DON'T have to upgrade every 3 years or be left in the dust

With the Xbox; Microsoft tried to apply a PC strategy in a console world, and (aside from many other mistakes that put the Xbox behind the PS2), that's what hurt them

The only reason it sold what it did was that it provided us Americans with the kind of content we crave, just like the 360 is

"jojo29, the bottom line is: who wants a 5 year old system? You mention PC gaming - try buying a top-of-the-line PC, then gaming on it for 5 years. Still playing new games fluidly at native LCD resolution with eye candy after 5 years? I didn't think so. "

Thats if you buy into the graphic card manufacturer's hype. Heres some simple math for you: Developers CAN'T, IN NO WAY, develop games faster than technology comes out. Thats fact. Yeah, DX10 is coming. But guess what? Games released THIS year, and NEXT year will still be on DX9, save for those 1 or 2 few titles. Game developing will never ever 'catch up' with technology, why? They have 1-2 year life cycles, EVEN WHEN they use other companies' graphic/physics engines.

Now you asked if i wanted to build a top of the line gaming system and try gaming on it for 5 years? Simple, im almost there. I built my computer in 2004, just in time for World of Warcraft.

I built my computer to handle games in 2004. I play C&C3 with ALL OPTIONS on highest settings, with a GREAT framerate. Why? becasue i know how long it takes to make a game. I know that my system was "good enough" to handle all these games, even BACK in 2004. C&C was probably developed around 2006.

And here is the surprise: Im still using an AGP based system. yeah, its "Top of the line" like you say, but when my games look ALMOST the same as the guy who has that what is it now 8800 GTS Nvidia card ( if you know computers i think thats the top card right now?(

In the HMV around me, there is a ps3 running videos of casino royal and other movies in its self contained case. Right next to it are the top selling 360 games. I didn't see anybody watch the movies for longer than 30 secs before going walking two steps to the 360 section and looking at some actual games avalible to buy.

It's the oldest argument in the world, but games sell systems.

@10

No your right. One person's games libray is not an indication of how good a system is. I was just trying to point out that a lot of MS guys are saying ow great the system is, my brother included, and yet he has so few games, i myself had over 20 titles on my ps2

@11

I agree with you. Consoles are meant to last quite a while, unlike PCs, thats what make consoles, consoles

@ 6

If you knew anything about the game industy you would know that the xbox came out the PS2 came out in Japan on March 4, 2000, AFTER the Dreamcast, as THAT system was its competitor at the time.

The Xbox came out November 15, 2001 in North America;

So tell me, how is that TOO late???

the xbox1 came two years after PS2, the console race was already established.

MS took what they learned from that first try, and jumped out ahead to be first on the next generation. remember the goal is to be no.1 not no.2 (see Sega)

if it were up to Sony, we'd all still be buying PS2s and PS2 games well into 2007, and taken their sweet time with the PS3 (like they did with the PS2).

PS3 didn't ship with rumble, Home, or games..it's obvious to everybody by now that the PS3 came out incomplete. the 360 forced them to release it.

if 360 gets to be no.1 this generation, you can expect more 360 variants but not a new console until PS4 makes them have to.


it's a billion dollar game of leapfrog.




.

jojo - ok, you know so much, when did PS2 come out in North America?



.

@16

This makes the xbox came out too late gap even smaller.

PS2 came out in North America on October 26, 2000

It was only a gap of a year and a month

And that 1 year 1 month gap sure as hell didn't help the Dreamcast...

9/9/99 SEGA fanboys shall always remember...

@18

"9/9/99 SEGA fanboys shall always remember"

I still shed tears....

Dreamcast had one of the best game libaries ever..or should i say HAS, as i still have mine:)

so it's announcement was in 1999? regardless, the point remains: xbox1 was cut short to get a head start on this generation. if 360 gets to be no.1 this round, they will do all they can to keep that format alive as long as possible.

you make money selling games, not selling new loss leading hardware.




.

Ps2 was also riding the success wave of the ps1 jojo, the original xbox didnt sell as well since it was a newcomer to the scene, so people were timid to buy them.

xbox1 was late to the gaming game.



.

jojo please shut the **** up. What do you mean you xbox guys!!! Before your comment there werent any fanboys here. As a matter nobody even mentioned xbox being any better or anything like that. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT HAVE ONE SO AGAIN SHUT THE **** UP!!!! how can you comment on something you dont have and/or know about.PS3 simply does not have the software...POINT BLANK!!!! I dont care how you spin it PS3 just does not have the games. Which is NO excuse. The ps3 was announced when the 360 was announced so they had ample time to get Dev kits ready.....um but no they didnt they fucked around with Blu-ray and got held up. So now its taking forever for games to come out.........And I especially dont get why your here you love your PC why do you even care whats going on here. and yes your oblivian is free but most of the other RPGs arent.....so again Please shut the **** up! and you if you have a 4year old pc playing high end games then you must not have sh*t on it because pc's(OS systems) slowdown over time they just do. Im sick of you PC fruit cakes coming over here talking s**t!

@scott

Good point. PS2 was riding on the success of the PSone. But,then why can't we count on the PS3's riding on the PS2's success? Again, the PS1 continued to outsell the PS2, well into the PS2's first year, kinda like what is happening now. Also the PS2 didnt pickup steam, until the xmas season the next year. Sony is like the tortoise, takes a while to get up to speed on things, but once it gets going, it keeps on going on a steady pace. Historically speaking. Im not trying to predict the future here. But hey it could happen

Also, i will give MS their due. They were the new kid on the block and they managed to carve out a nice slice( slices) of gaming pie for themselves. But they had to shaft their own fanbase to do that, which is not cool in my eyes. For all the crap that Sony's Top executives have said and pulled, they never shafted their fanbase like MS did, again in my opinion. So let's say the 360 Elite comes out, MS has a good year, but then in October the scales turn in Sony's favor and BOOM they release hit after hit after hit till the end of next year. If MS bails on teh 360, would you be cool with that?

Now granted, if the situation is reveresed, it would suck badly for SOny, but they played their cards, they got outdealt, and thats it. I wouldn't feel resentment towards Sony, they played their hand, they fucked up, move on. Why wouldnt i feel shafted? Because at least they played a hand. MS is the type, again in my opinion and really only in regards to their Xbox, that they will just give up.

Sony's journey in the games industry has been long and hard. They got shafted when they tried to come out with the CD version of the SNES ( or maybe they tried to shaft nintendo? either way, Sony was out of the games industry at that point)

BUT did they give up? Nope, they wanted our money too much ( what you thought i was really into Sony caring about us? pffft) and kept on working and BAM! Playstation 1 came out. The rest is history. I feel they "earned" their position as industry leaders. Sure they pulled some dirty tricks, but i mean who doesnt? But they took a "risk" on a gaming platform and they pulled it off and them greedy bastards got our money.

Now Xbox, they want our money too. BUT the method on how they got there system out is different. Bill Gates was wondering one day, hey i should try to make a games system, why not, i got the money. So what if i bomb the first time, ill just keep throwing money at it until it sells ( i forgot what magazine he said that in, ill look for THAT EXACT quote, Ill just "throw" money at it until it sells, yeah how cool) Now with that mentality, i feel they dont respect the games industry. They know they can afford to make mistakes. Xbox is not a risk for the company, therefore, they dont care to release a new system every few years and shaft their fanbase

Sony can't afford that risk, so they can't afford to make many mistakes ( i know i know, they not follwoing througgh with that methodolgy very good now are they lol ) but at least to me it shows to me that Sony will stick with this "deck of cards" to the end.

Now, im not saying i want MS out the race. By all means we neeed em to keep Sony/Nintendo from getting their heads too big ( Sony again is like a tortoise, slow to learn these things) but MS on top of the game industry? Windows anyone? MS? Games Industry?

That scares me

Funny how you guys are bickering about when xbox1 came out vs. when ps2 did whilst simultaneously criticizing analysts for being backwards-looking. Everything is different now. MS and Sony have invested hugely in both digital content creation and distribution. Both systems will enjoy support beyond 5 years. The leap in terms of quality and features this generation basically ensures that people will be buying these suckers for years to come. All you can do is wait and see anyway. My PS3, to me, was worth every penny. I hope you all feel the same about your X360. Peace.

ask the continent of europe if they weren't screwed by Sony.


you may not like Windows (i certainly don't), but MS's strengths outside gaming brought us Xbox Live.


Sony's strengths outside gaming brought us ....Blu-Ray.



.

Damn those Europeans are some suckers. Who in their right mind buys a PS3?



(I'm European, now living in the US -- so I can say these things!)

@mitchell

Huh? Did you even read posts 1-3?

"and you if you have a 4year old pc playing high end games then you must not have sh*t on it because pc's(OS systems) slowdown over time they just do. Im sick of you PC fruit cakes coming over here talking s**t!"

They "just do" huh? Wow. That right there shows me the limitations you have when dealing with PCs.

That means you dont understand how games run on PCs or CONSOLES for that matter.

You don't know the meaning of phrases such as "Overclocking" or "Liquid Cooling"

What does my love for PCs have to do with my love for consoles? I OWN a PS3 so how do i not like consoles? My bro, who lives with me, OWNS BOTH a Wii AND a 360 and we play Gears of War regularly, PGR racing is fun, Dragon Ball Z with the Wii-mote is breathtakingly( literally) awesome?

"PC Fruitcake"

Nice. your limited intelligence makes laugh and cry. I laugh because of how morons like you get "passed up" in school because of your age ( face it, you did't pass 5th grade because you were smart, you passed because you reached the age limit) and cry because i can't believe your parents have to deal with you everyday

@25

Touche :) BUT we've yet to see how well Blu-ray actually does. If it bombs, then TOUCHE indeed!

@25

Oh yeah and remember

SONY/Phillps developed Compact Discs ( CD's)

@Jojo29

Why don't you just give it a rest. You already solidified that you are a bashing ps3 fanboy owner. From what I read on your last comments you are the only one that owns the ps3 and your brother owns the 360 and wii. So you only owning the ps3 makes you want to bash the compatition, because you're a complete sony diehard. I understand that it was your money you spent on it, so yes you have the right to defend it. You do not have the right to bash other consoles.

"Not much of a variety for being out one year and a half." -about the 360

Spoken like a true diehard fan that has never truely looked at the gaming line up of the 360. Honestly, there are games out there for the console and soon to be released. Dead Rising, Lost planet, Crackdown, Forza 2, Mass effect and many more other great games.


I have nothing agianst any console. (maybe the ps3 only because the controller isn't comfortable to me, but that it.) Each console has its advantages. The only thing I do have agianst any console has to be the people that have them that come on to these sites to post bashing remarks, just to make themselves feel better or even get a childish laugh out of it. Grow up, and play your console.

@Kiler

your brother owns the 360 and wii.

My bro lives with me?? Our systems are all in the living room? Go read the first 3 posts. Thats why i "blindly defend the PS3". Comments like those are everywhere, whether the news is positive or not

In fact please read the entire thread. Earlier i was labeled a "PC Fruitcake" in that i dont even like consoles.

And if you even read further on, you will see that i do enjoy 360 games, and that i 'took' back that direct comment i made about my bro only owning 5 games.

Read please. Its that thing they taught you at school :)

Jo, Sony also put out out SACD, UMD, MD, BETA and Memory Stick. what's your point?

.

@ Jojo29

Oh yeah and remember

Sony developed betamax. Point taken.

Personally why are we defend any of these companies. They're all about making money anyway. Besides, do they really care if we (gamers) were around? Nope. (well maybe Nintendo, because all the make are consoles) Microsoft doesn't care because they have a billion or more dollar fall back net (Operating systems) why else do you think they could stomach the loses they suffered from the 1st xbox. Sony has the same net in electronics and movies. It's the perfect form of conglomerates, some just the same company just different divisions. We're just pons in the great game of capitalism. It's fun isn't it? I think so.

Well said R. Thank you.

call me crazy, but i think it should still be about games. regardless of all the extra features of both consoles, xbox live at its core means much more to games than blu-ray. or even Home.

.

@jojo29

Well I'm sorry when I was writing that first post it was when you had only posted the first 2 comments. I left my computer to do something else more important that argueing on a site like this. I'm sorry that I have a life.

"Read please. Its that thing they taught you at school :)"

Wow, that's cute.

(Note: I could have said something as a comeback, but what is the point? You would have obviously just shugged it off. (Like I did you're.) Because I have heard better, by far.)

Now, this is just me, just my opinion, but I want all consoles to succeed, Fuck I even recommend Gears of War to a friend because I too own gears of war and want everyone to succeed, more game consoles, more games and game variety equals all gamers win

My problem is xbots, good God, For months ever negative Fact about the 360 goes ignored and believe me their are plenty of them, but mere speculation and rumors about the ps3 gets treated as if its real

For instance way back when every one (mainly xbots) thought the ps3 games would be like 70-100 dollars because of blu-ray annoyed the hell out of me because there has been no official announcements stating anything like this, but Xbots treated it as if it was fact....

But here when you get real official reports of the "red rings of Death" not from blog posting but actually on TV, and here on joystiq and even developers, yes game developers said that their 360 crashed, nobody pays attention, over 18 months and we still have this issue and nobody wants to really talk about it, but xbots "it's just sony fanboys that are making these stories up".. and " these people don't know how to treat their consoles".........please

but even hint that you like the ps3 or even like the future of the ps3 and all hell breaks lose, but say that my 360 crashed, infact on TV today as I post this, have been reports that people who, update or patch or something with Guitar Hero 2 for the 360 end up getting the "red rings of death" and we barely here about it
(either 3.2 billion dollar campaign is money well spent, or people are just bias, idiots)

No, please don't get me wrong, online is great, and (live pwns or whater) but if I had a choice between, lets say take your favorite game, if it was giving more space for developers to make the game longer, hell games cost more to buy so why not have a longer and better experiences hint Blu-ray or the choice of the same game but with online.......

Not don't get me wrong online is great but I really don't care for the ability of playing people halfway around the world I would never meet, my point is that I play and buy games for gaming sake, I don't need to compete in some online community just to get some half-ass value out of a "next gen" game.....yeah girls are really impressed when you show them your live points, I bet they can't wait to jump in bed with you then ( sarcasm)
( I couldn't care less for HOME either)

I want to look a game and go "Holy Shit, I didn't think that was possible" I don't want to say " the game is really shallow, no real innovation, nothing new, ridiculously short, but the ONLINE Pwns1!!11!!!) what the fuck? I am paying more for just online,........I am no PC Gamer, but hey if online is so damn popular and the only thing that makes a game good, then hell I might as well go all out and get the Best High-End PC



....Crysis look Fucking awesome

suck, i think the hardware problems of the 360 are talked about quite a lot. especially here.

it's definitely a knock on the 360, so much so that MS acknowledged it and responded by increasing the warranty and reimbursing people with bad units.

it should speak some that even with these problems people still love their 360s, even if it's their second (or third) unit. 10 million users are using their 360s a LOT.

yes, the PS3 seems like a better built machine, but there's only a tenth of them out there as 360s, it came out a year later, cost $200 more, and there haven't been nearly as many games to test the hardware.

so honestly, which is the bigger problem? i definitely appreciate the build quality of my PS3, but so far, all i really know is that it holds up to hours of folding@home, and that's not what we paid $600 for is it?



.

also, online doesn't just mean fragfests with strangers. you're right, PCs do excel at that.

Live brings a lot more than just that though, it's more about people you do know (and get to know). especially with online console-specific games with things like online co-op.


.

jojo-

I read your comment claiming that you still game with a machine built in 2004, claiming that you were "almost" to five years. Not quite. First of all, the two games that you listed, WoW and C&C3 are hardly "demanding" titles when it comes to PC games. Trust me when I say that within 12 months your PC will be near obsolete, and within 24 months the only thing your PC will still be able to run are non-demanding RTS titles and games like WoW that are designed to work with the masses not for the top-end users.

I highly doubt that you will be able to run UT3 at the highest settings at a decent resolution (anything less than 1280x1024 or 1440x900 for WS doesn't count as a "decent" resolution) as a matter of fact, I guarantee it. It's a DX9 game.

You are crazy to think that you can build a PC that will allow you to play the most cutting egde games at max settings that will last 5 years. The only logical way I could see that happening is if you purchase the absolute top-of-the-line parts across the board.

As far the XBOX goes, MS didn't bail out on it because they wanted you to buy the 360, they bailed out on it because it was a money pit. They were at a point when they weren't gaining any ground on the PS2 and the XBOX was still being sold at a loss after 4 years. So they cut their losses and moved on. Like others have said, I highly doubt that is MS' plan with the 360. They want to make a profit, and you simply cannot do so if you launch a new platform every 4 years. You forget that these companies (MS/Sony) sell these things at a loss in the beginning. The only reason MS would abandon the 360 and release something new THAT prematurely is if the 360 tanked. Obviously it's not going to tank. So I'd say it will be at LEAST 2010 before we begin to hear tangible details about a new console from MS.

I forgot to mention. My system is running a gig of PC3200 RAM, an AthlonXP 3200+, an Abit NF-7 board, and an ATI Radeon X800XT. My PC was top of the line when I got it. I spent almost $1500 all together on it...and now I can barely run BF2, a game that is over a year old, at max settings at 1440x900. If I push it much more than that my framerate just doesn't keep up.

I can agree to an extent, the 360 does have the better games, but my opinion and its not just me is that he 360 hasn't shown me anything new, Gears Of War( Damn Good Game) just seems to be a Extremely well done Killzone, ( a not so good game) and this is over 18 months and still good games but nothing I haven't seen before

Now I spent about 5 seconds looking into what the ps3 would have coming in it's future and White Knight Story is something I have can barely make sense out of...it's like Xenogears and power rangers with a little bit of Final Fantasy all in one....and you know what I like it, that is what I want to see in this "next-gen" world something that freaks me out and a must buy, not something that " I have seen this before, nothing new, no real story but I can't wait to pwn some noobs online" what the hell? I am not alone in this

"yes, the PS3 seems like a better built machine, but there's only a tenth of them out there as 360s, it came out a year later, cost $200 more, and there haven't been nearly as many games to test the hardware."

its more like 4 to 10........ a tenth is 1 to 10.......you do know how to do math?...Right Digi?
and I guess Folding@home, when people leave their ps3s on overnight isn't really testing the hardware,

"it should speak some that even with these problems people still love their 360s, even if it's their second (or third) unit. 10 million users are using their 360s a LOT. "

but I have heard people say that they can only play there 360s a few hours in fear of red rings of death, and why deal with a console that breaks on you 2,3 or even four times?, yeah its like being in a abusive relationship but don't want to leave because "he only hits be because we loves me"

"so honestly, which is the bigger problem?" Halo and Online is what made the Xbox 1 fanboys wet their pants but it was barely a threat or concern to anyone else.......my point is that The Wii is like 7 to 10 with the 360, how is this even possible with the 360 being over 18 montjs out and the wii is just 19 weeks..........Maybe, just maybe Microsoft hasn't really changed or did anything new, " lets release more half-ass games, but make sure the online PWNS!!1!1)
and one last thing, if I buy a 400 (360) Dollar system and repeatedly get issues, Ring of Death

"Awful overheating issues
MS sending back refurbished units usually in worse condition
Games being horribly scratched
MS's Customer Service reps given other ppl's info away"...(LOL, these are not even my comments)

but all I need for the ps3 is good games and from what it looks like the ps3 will deliver , so I hate to answer a question with another question but "so honestly, which is the bigger problem"

"Live brings a lot more than just that though, it's more about people you do know (and get to know). especially with online console-specific games with things like online co-op."

I said that online really is a great feature, but it shouldn't be the primary way of judging a game, again, if the game sucks already, why sould I care if I can play it online "becuase LIvE PWNSSS"?..yeah I know that, I need a real reason

"more about people you do know (and get to know).
If I want to hang out with my friends, I don't know maybe I should like go to their homes or hang out with them outside.......fuck are we getting so half-ass and fat that we would replace real encounters with people in some fake online world?

and if I want to meet some people, I would do ohh I don't know go outside and go to parties, but hey that is just me

I forgot to mention. My system is running a gig of PC3200 RAM, an AthlonXP 3200+, an Abit NF-7 board, and an ATI Radeon X800XT. My PC was top of the line when I got it. I spent almost $1500 all together on it...and now I can barely run BF2, a game that is over a year old, at max settings at 1440x900. If I push it much more than that my framerate just doesn't keep up.

One particular debate that irks me: "PS3 had a year longer to get things done and done right" that is used against the ps3 just getting background downloading, and various other features.

LOL what a coincedence, our systems are nearly the same. Only that i have 3 gbs of RAM ( RAM does help but you can't have too much it ) and the graphic card i have is the Radeon X1600Pro ( the 512MB version ) I can run BF just fine, not at that high of a resolution, i think im at the 1200 setting?? THe framerate is nice and solid.

Maybe because i've overclocked my CPU/RAM settings?

Also, yes i do know that my system will be obsolete by then, you gotta love Joystiq's random text cap.

There was another paragraph about that exact question.

I had fun debating with you, we kept it civil and on topic.

one more thing: how was bailing on xbox going to save money, when MS doesnt expect to make profits till 2008, SINCE the xbox brand started?

Serious question:

What is the Xbox 360 "experience" all about? What are the "must have" exclusive games? Obviously Gears is the first to come to mind, but that's not the whole story, is it? And don't tell me about distant, upcoming titles like Halo 3 (just assume Final Fantasy cancels that out in must-have/sales). The argument is that the 360 gaming experience is better RIGHT NOW, but what makes this true?

From my vantage it's just a lot of tepid games. Lost Planet, Crackdown, Dead Rising, etc.. Most of those titles scored worse than Resistance on average (for example). Dead or Alive 4 seems easily countered by the VF5/Tekken 5 combo. Motorstorm is a nice counter to whatever the top exclusive racing game on the 360 is (PGR?).

Going forward, Capcom looks to be purely multiplatform. Even Team Ninja is giving the PS3 a small bit of preferential love.

I mean variety is good, sure, but I remember the days of the PS1 and the "1 good title for 100 crappy titles" syndrome.

If you had to make a list of the 5 games that make the Xbox 360 specifically worth owning (so no multiplatform), what would they be? Obviously the list for PS3 goes: Resistance, Motorstorm, Virtua Fighter 5 (exclusive for now), and after that it's sort of whatever: a bunch of middling/multiplatform titles.

For the 360 it's Gears and ....?

@James

"For the 360 it's Gears and ....?"

Gears and LIVE, Jeez, james don't you know "Live PWNSSSSSS everything?"

LOL, sorry, James but it was going to be me or some XBot....couldn't help myself

until White Knight Story and the like come out, we can only really guess. you seem to like japanese style games James and Suck, hey guess what, so do i that's why i bought a PS3, but gundam isn't cutting it is it?

a lot of what you both said comes down to your personal taste in games (and assumptions that all xbox fans are just about Halo; not true), but one thing you can't say is that 360 didn't bring anything new.

Live (let's call it online ANYwhere), Arcade (downloadable games), HD games, these were all pioneered by 360.

as convenient as it is for you, you can't just dismiss every one of the 10 million 360 owners as online halo-obsessed who put up with constant hardware malfunctions. neither applies to me, my 360 has been rock-solid since launch and has seen Halo only once. as Suck said, "i'm not alone in this"

again, Live is more than just multiplayer, as i said above. also, some of us do have friends outside of our block or dorm (or grade). like across the nation or across the globe even.



.

Hey, I'm not trying to start any trouble. I'm genuinely curious what everybody thinks the "must have" 360 titles are. I can't really get a good read from the internet. Seems to be a mish-mash of GRAW, R6, and the Capcom titles as far as I can tell.

Heh too many ps3 fans around. I think the best way to fight them is to ignore them. We should let them live in their world of no sense.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLHJqX13yGc lol @ this
blue dragon review. White knight for the win!