Killzone 2 release date is Feb. 27, 'similar timeframe' for PAL release
by Ross Miller 
on Dec 5th 2008 11:59AM
108
Reader Comments (108)
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 12:17PM sk8monroe81 said
levi this was in my previous comment:
but your right gears, halo, cod4, and fable 2 have had issues on the 360.
socom and LBP issues are not why i dont like the ps3. i really just like the 360 more. its not ps3 hate.
being an american gamer i just feel that ms gears all products and support to my gaming environment.
if i lived in asia i would def be a sony fanboy because there are many other sony ps3 japan exclusive games and releases.
now that sony is releasing more and more exclusive games that dont look another 360 unreal engine 3 game, i am beginning to shut my mouth and play the ps3 more and more.
Reply
but your right gears, halo, cod4, and fable 2 have had issues on the 360.
socom and LBP issues are not why i dont like the ps3. i really just like the 360 more. its not ps3 hate.
being an american gamer i just feel that ms gears all products and support to my gaming environment.
if i lived in asia i would def be a sony fanboy because there are many other sony ps3 japan exclusive games and releases.
now that sony is releasing more and more exclusive games that dont look another 360 unreal engine 3 game, i am beginning to shut my mouth and play the ps3 more and more.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 12:08AM Levi said
ok, here's the deal. MOST of the games that are good on EITHER system are multiplatform. I just finished Dead Space, I'm playing Mirror's Edge, and I'm gonna start Fallout 3 tomorrow.
Next. There really aren't that many games that I care about on the 360. I never liked Halo, Gears of War looks OK, but my friends say it's overrated, and this is a case where I trust their opinion. Killzone has held my interest day 1, as I liked the first game, loved the PSP game, and this looks like nothing but awesome to me.
Finally, the last difference between systems comes down to the controller. Apparently there are people who think the 360 controller is superior for shooters. That's fine if you like it better, but it's not technically superior. I really think if Halo 3 was on PS3, for example, you'd have just as many pros with the Dual Shock than with the 360. I really think it's a complete preference. I personally like the DS3 better, as I don't like the oddball placement of the analog sticks on the 360 controller. None of the things people bash the DS3 for have EVER bothered me.
I lied, one more thing. The 360 has a year head start on the PS3. Give the PS3 one more year and it will have a superb lineup on top of an already solid one. You 360 fanboys forget about the PSN? I've spent over $100 on awesome $10 games. It more than competes with XBLA.
The hardware equivalent 360 of the PS3 is the elite for $400. Don't tell me that the XBox 360 Arcade competes with the PS3, because it's not the same.
So. If you don't like Halo, and Killzone looks good, or you want Little Big Planet, then there is NO WAY the 360 is a better choice for you. Any idiot who comes in here with an elitist attitude saying their 360 "pwns the PS3" is just a stupid fucking fanboy. There are plenty of great games, the system has just as many good things going for it as the 360.
The 360 is a great system. If you like the Halo series or think Gears of War is the shit, or if you don't care about Resistance or LBP, then go for the 360. My whole point is that anybody saying one is better than the other is just a fanboy and should seriously just shut the fuck up. I almost got a 360 instead, and I am personally very happy with my purchase of a PS3 instead. That doesn't mean I'm saying it's superior, I'm just saying it was the right purchase for me. So anybody who says the 360 is just better, or the ps3 is just better, should die.
The end.
Next. There really aren't that many games that I care about on the 360. I never liked Halo, Gears of War looks OK, but my friends say it's overrated, and this is a case where I trust their opinion. Killzone has held my interest day 1, as I liked the first game, loved the PSP game, and this looks like nothing but awesome to me.
Finally, the last difference between systems comes down to the controller. Apparently there are people who think the 360 controller is superior for shooters. That's fine if you like it better, but it's not technically superior. I really think if Halo 3 was on PS3, for example, you'd have just as many pros with the Dual Shock than with the 360. I really think it's a complete preference. I personally like the DS3 better, as I don't like the oddball placement of the analog sticks on the 360 controller. None of the things people bash the DS3 for have EVER bothered me.
I lied, one more thing. The 360 has a year head start on the PS3. Give the PS3 one more year and it will have a superb lineup on top of an already solid one. You 360 fanboys forget about the PSN? I've spent over $100 on awesome $10 games. It more than competes with XBLA.
The hardware equivalent 360 of the PS3 is the elite for $400. Don't tell me that the XBox 360 Arcade competes with the PS3, because it's not the same.
So. If you don't like Halo, and Killzone looks good, or you want Little Big Planet, then there is NO WAY the 360 is a better choice for you. Any idiot who comes in here with an elitist attitude saying their 360 "pwns the PS3" is just a stupid fucking fanboy. There are plenty of great games, the system has just as many good things going for it as the 360.
The 360 is a great system. If you like the Halo series or think Gears of War is the shit, or if you don't care about Resistance or LBP, then go for the 360. My whole point is that anybody saying one is better than the other is just a fanboy and should seriously just shut the fuck up. I almost got a 360 instead, and I am personally very happy with my purchase of a PS3 instead. That doesn't mean I'm saying it's superior, I'm just saying it was the right purchase for me. So anybody who says the 360 is just better, or the ps3 is just better, should die.
The end.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 12:28PM sk8monroe81 said
levi just to clafiry console costs:
xbox arcade is the same console as the elite minus the black color, 120 gb hard drive, and HDMI cables (ps3 comes with no HD cables either).
so you buy an arcade on sale for $ 180 - $ 200 that comes with 5 games, now bundles have 7 total games for the holiday.
they you buy a 120gb hdd for $ 135 or a refurb at gamestop for $60 - $ 100.
then u buy a good HDMI online for $ 10.
360 arcade with 120gb HDD & BC + 5-7 games + 256 mb travel memory card total cost =
$ 250 - 345 (depending on when you bought & where you bought, its the holiday there are many deals)
120 gb ps3 with no BC + 1 game = $ 499 + $ 10 HDMI cable
total cost = $ 510
+ remember anyone who purchases an arcade model can buy the upgrade pack for $ 99 which is a new 60gb hdd, headset, 3 months of live, ethernet cable.
so $ 300 for a 60gb 360
and $ 400 for an 80gb ps3.
the initial costs to play games on the ps3 or 360 is obviously cheaper on the 360.
of course you get so much more for your money with the ps3. expensive blu ray compenents, wifi, web, etc.
Reply
xbox arcade is the same console as the elite minus the black color, 120 gb hard drive, and HDMI cables (ps3 comes with no HD cables either).
so you buy an arcade on sale for $ 180 - $ 200 that comes with 5 games, now bundles have 7 total games for the holiday.
they you buy a 120gb hdd for $ 135 or a refurb at gamestop for $60 - $ 100.
then u buy a good HDMI online for $ 10.
360 arcade with 120gb HDD & BC + 5-7 games + 256 mb travel memory card total cost =
$ 250 - 345 (depending on when you bought & where you bought, its the holiday there are many deals)
120 gb ps3 with no BC + 1 game = $ 499 + $ 10 HDMI cable
total cost = $ 510
+ remember anyone who purchases an arcade model can buy the upgrade pack for $ 99 which is a new 60gb hdd, headset, 3 months of live, ethernet cable.
so $ 300 for a 60gb 360
and $ 400 for an 80gb ps3.
the initial costs to play games on the ps3 or 360 is obviously cheaper on the 360.
of course you get so much more for your money with the ps3. expensive blu ray compenents, wifi, web, etc.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 2:47PM Levi said
First, I was under the impression that the Elite was the only model with Wi-Fi built in, which is a pretty nice feature that the PS3 has. Second, where the hell are you getting your prices? PS3's that are $500 right now have software backwards compatibility. PS3's that don't have BC are $400, add a game for $60 and an HDMI for $10, and that's $470 (assuming we're not adding on tax). Do NOT put bundles into the equation. Bundles do not count. Every bundle I've seen for the XBox lately is BS unless you are a die hard fan of Kung Fu Panda and Lego [insert franchise here] games. So no bundles.
The Arcade version comes with neither a hard drive or a wireless controller. If we are being fair here, we have to add everything that the PS3 comes packed with (which really means the Elite is the only one that truly compares, but I'll humor you). The only thing I can find in retail stores for HDD's for the 360 are the 160GB and the 60GB Live starter pack. We'll go with the starter pack, since the 60GB HDD is closest. Take off like $30 from the $100 price tag for [my estimate of] the 3 months of free Live, and you have to add $70 to the Arcade. Add another $50 for the wireless controller, and you're up to $320. So, it would only make sense for people to go with the Pro at this point. It's just more cost effective at $300, if it comes with a wireless controller, I can't remember?
Now Live. Live is admittedly a better service than what Sony has going for the PS3, but it's because it's a unified system that everyone pays for. Sony put multiplayer in the hands of the companies putting the games out. Keeping in mind that the PS3 is 1 year behind, we don't have as big of an online base yet. Home is right around the corner, which, whether you care about it or not, will bring that multiplayer base together, as well as likely expand it. And it's free. So, to be fair here, we have to add the costs of Live. I don't remember how much it is, but if you add on Live for a year, it's at least $50 right? also, taken right off of Best Buy's site from the description of the Pro:
"HDMI output
Lets you experience games in up to full 1080p high resolution for incredible clarity and detail (HDMI cable not included)."
So add $10 on to your 360 budget.
All in all, if you really want to compare the prices of the systems, you have to be 100% fair, and I think I did a pretty good job here. The differences, if you add them up, are going to be around $50. That makes the Blu-Ray functionality of the PS3 cost $50. You want to go spend more money on an HD-DVD drive for your 360, it's going to cost you more. I'm sorry, but the value is not much better. They are, once again, about the same value.
The only thing I lost here is backwards compatibility. But the 360 loses out on built-in wireless internet. You can argue which is a more important feature, but when it comes down to it, putting a used PS2 on to that budget gets you an incredibly far superior library of PS1 and PS2 games compared to the library of original XBox games. So we'll just say we're even at this point.
The only way I can see someone winning this argument is if you strictly say "right now, the 360 has more games, therefore I might get more entertainment out of it right now." Keeping in mind that the PS3 is a year behind, though, and by mid 09 to end 09, PS3 will have a fantastic library on top of what is already becoming a great one. I have so many games to play on my PS3 right now I don't know what to do when I sit down. It cost me slightly more than a 360 when you add up the features, and I get to watch Blu-Rays on my 1080p LCD. Saying one is better than the other at this point is JUST AN OPINION.
Reply
The Arcade version comes with neither a hard drive or a wireless controller. If we are being fair here, we have to add everything that the PS3 comes packed with (which really means the Elite is the only one that truly compares, but I'll humor you). The only thing I can find in retail stores for HDD's for the 360 are the 160GB and the 60GB Live starter pack. We'll go with the starter pack, since the 60GB HDD is closest. Take off like $30 from the $100 price tag for [my estimate of] the 3 months of free Live, and you have to add $70 to the Arcade. Add another $50 for the wireless controller, and you're up to $320. So, it would only make sense for people to go with the Pro at this point. It's just more cost effective at $300, if it comes with a wireless controller, I can't remember?
Now Live. Live is admittedly a better service than what Sony has going for the PS3, but it's because it's a unified system that everyone pays for. Sony put multiplayer in the hands of the companies putting the games out. Keeping in mind that the PS3 is 1 year behind, we don't have as big of an online base yet. Home is right around the corner, which, whether you care about it or not, will bring that multiplayer base together, as well as likely expand it. And it's free. So, to be fair here, we have to add the costs of Live. I don't remember how much it is, but if you add on Live for a year, it's at least $50 right? also, taken right off of Best Buy's site from the description of the Pro:
"HDMI output
Lets you experience games in up to full 1080p high resolution for incredible clarity and detail (HDMI cable not included)."
So add $10 on to your 360 budget.
All in all, if you really want to compare the prices of the systems, you have to be 100% fair, and I think I did a pretty good job here. The differences, if you add them up, are going to be around $50. That makes the Blu-Ray functionality of the PS3 cost $50. You want to go spend more money on an HD-DVD drive for your 360, it's going to cost you more. I'm sorry, but the value is not much better. They are, once again, about the same value.
The only thing I lost here is backwards compatibility. But the 360 loses out on built-in wireless internet. You can argue which is a more important feature, but when it comes down to it, putting a used PS2 on to that budget gets you an incredibly far superior library of PS1 and PS2 games compared to the library of original XBox games. So we'll just say we're even at this point.
The only way I can see someone winning this argument is if you strictly say "right now, the 360 has more games, therefore I might get more entertainment out of it right now." Keeping in mind that the PS3 is a year behind, though, and by mid 09 to end 09, PS3 will have a fantastic library on top of what is already becoming a great one. I have so many games to play on my PS3 right now I don't know what to do when I sit down. It cost me slightly more than a 360 when you add up the features, and I get to watch Blu-Rays on my 1080p LCD. Saying one is better than the other at this point is JUST AN OPINION.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 4:11PM sk8monroe81 said
no point in taking this any further as you have gotten many things wrong.
1) every arcade console comes with a wireless controller.
2) the ps3 160 gb console has no BC.
3) the elite has no wifi
4) xbox only makes 120 gb HDD and 60gb, not 160gb.
and your comparing different models anyway.
lets just compare the models you can buy at a store.
ps3 80gb = $ 400.
360 pro 60gb = $ 300.
both play games the same, both need an HDMI.
thats $ 100 less to play games, remember most people dont care about blu ray.
now ps3 160 gb = $ 500
360 120gb = $ 400
once again thats $ 100 less to play games, but the elite comes with HDMI, so add $ 10 to the ps3.
people buy game consoles to play games # 1.
nobodys saying anything about the value received from the ps3 purchase, thats not what this was about.
just overall cost to a family to play games in maybe the worst US economy since the great depression, which is also affecting the entire world economy.
im not only talking for myself, but mostly for the millions of people that will choose the 360 over the ps3 due to the $ 100 price difference. we can already see it this holiday. 360 trumps ps3 3-1 on black friday, was posted on joystiq.com last week.
Reply
1) every arcade console comes with a wireless controller.
2) the ps3 160 gb console has no BC.
3) the elite has no wifi
4) xbox only makes 120 gb HDD and 60gb, not 160gb.
and your comparing different models anyway.
lets just compare the models you can buy at a store.
ps3 80gb = $ 400.
360 pro 60gb = $ 300.
both play games the same, both need an HDMI.
thats $ 100 less to play games, remember most people dont care about blu ray.
now ps3 160 gb = $ 500
360 120gb = $ 400
once again thats $ 100 less to play games, but the elite comes with HDMI, so add $ 10 to the ps3.
people buy game consoles to play games # 1.
nobodys saying anything about the value received from the ps3 purchase, thats not what this was about.
just overall cost to a family to play games in maybe the worst US economy since the great depression, which is also affecting the entire world economy.
im not only talking for myself, but mostly for the millions of people that will choose the 360 over the ps3 due to the $ 100 price difference. we can already see it this holiday. 360 trumps ps3 3-1 on black friday, was posted on joystiq.com last week.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 4:19PM sk8monroe81 said
no current ps3 model offers BC playback, but it should be noted that 360 bc sucks, and who uses it anyway..
im glad i have my ps3 80gb with BC because i have played a few ps2 games on it.
Reply
im glad i have my ps3 80gb with BC because i have played a few ps2 games on it.
Posted: Dec 6th 2008 6:55PM (Unverified) said
Lets not make any comparisons here ok. Gears of War 2 is a third person shooter and Killzone is a FPS. I own a PS3 and yet i do admire Gears of War for what it is ( I have the pc version ) and i enjoyed playing it. Ive seen the demos of killzone and im looking forward to the multiplayer and i hope it is on par with Resistance 2 multiplayer. Having great graphics is great but if it isnt fun then it loses its appeal. Im not gonna bash Halo 3 either cause i played the first and also enjoyed it. My point is we should at least play the game first before we bash it.
Posted: Dec 7th 2008 2:34AM Appleanche said
I think it's a safe bet to assume this game doesn't have the system seller impact that you would expect out of a game of this quality. Just like Resistance 2, and just like LBP.
Of course it all falls on Sony's crappy advertising core. I wonder if they'll do some D movie commercial like that awful resistance 2 one.
Not only does sony advertise the games poorly, they don't do it enough. I've only seen like 2-3 real LBP ads, not the weird ones where sackboy is looking at the people Xmas list thing.
Oh and please take a page from the Halo book and offer a $120 legendary edition with a Helgast helmet with goggles that light up with a switch plox.
Of course it all falls on Sony's crappy advertising core. I wonder if they'll do some D movie commercial like that awful resistance 2 one.
Not only does sony advertise the games poorly, they don't do it enough. I've only seen like 2-3 real LBP ads, not the weird ones where sackboy is looking at the people Xmas list thing.
Oh and please take a page from the Halo book and offer a $120 legendary edition with a Helgast helmet with goggles that light up with a switch plox.
