Alex

These threads are starting to kill me. If only everyone would just take a step back and take a look. If there is negative platform news, it's probably for a reason.

Facts on PS3 (yes FACTS):
PS3 has a slower GPU than 360
PS3 has SEVERE memory limitations
SPUs are limited in capability

Unless a title is built for the PS3, it's not a good thing. I see so many wannabe developers and programmers that love to spout off "lazy developers". I have nothing to say to people calling "lazy developers". You obviously have no idea what it takes to put a game out or you would never make such a comment.

If developers are having trouble with the PS3, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that Sony made some BS decisions that hurt development, could it? When titles are getting canceled and delayed, it couldn't POSSIBLY have anything to due with their hardware decisions, could it? Wake up.

Oh yeah, and MS messed up plenty themselves so don't get me started on that. They just screwed over the consumer with hardware choices instead of developers.

Also, your favorite console sucks! I gotta get back to work.

"It is the first year and Sony is on pace to meet or exceed the 360's first year in sales."

I think you are missing the point actually. Take hardware sales completely out of the equation. Hardware sales are not having an impact on publishers so much right now. There could be 20 million PS3s out in the public, but if games aren't selling and turning a profit, that 20 million number means nothing. Look at the PS3 software sales. They are not good by any means. A publisher is putting a game on the PS3 right now only hoping to maybe turn a profit even if the game is great...

That is the point.

I think you guys might be missing the point. I think the point isn't so much about the BC issue, but rather the seemingly continued backpedaling by Sony. Previous quotes that you all have seen have Sony commenting negatively about the competition because they don't have full BC and how it is an essential part of their PlayStation legacy. Reasonably, if they are willing to cut it out of a SKU they are telling the public that it really isn't as important to them as it appeared. That with recent decision to go back to rumble after similar comments brings us to the WTF award. Is losing BC itself a big deal? Probably not... The decisions that Sony is making to save their brand are.

My 2 cents.

I'm afraid you are incorrect. You need to get YOUR facts straight. You keep saying "look it up". All I'm asking is to prove your end of your argument. Blu-ray drives are approximately 30% slower in read speeds than the 360 drive. There is a reason the game I'm working on needs an option to install to the hard drive. No BS.

They aren't the same speed. Blu-ray is approximately 30% slower in read speeds than the 360 DVD drive. Why do you think most PS3 games have an install function?

"None of them have a Blu-ray player, and the HD-DVD will be out of business in a matter of months. Is this a ten-year product?"

This is like someone saying, the DS can't possibly succeed because it doesn't have UMD.

The 360 version of The Darkness is better than the PS3 version because...

I can actually play it in 1080p on my 360 when the "TrueHD" console can't.

Even with Lp47 flaming, I still don't understand how in this day and age people don't realize that more storage space does not equal better graphics.

One additional point I wanted to make... Generally I find that if you ask someone which is better, people who pick Blu-ray say it's because of the storage capacity. I find it interesting that it seems to be the only reason people are backing it up. If one were to look at content and capability (and practicality), I think the HD-DVD alternative is much more interesting. Is storage space really that relative right now? I'll watch Batman Begins and wonder what good is an extra 20 gigs when it'll have absolutely no impact whatsoever on the quality I'm seeing now... And remember that studio support is based on perceived market share. That can most definitely change...

I prefer HD-DVD over Blu-ray due to the features. Blu-ray may have some additional storage space, but HD-DVD supports features that its competition does not. I am enjoying some of the special features right now such as the picture in picture "movie experience" and what not and know that those same features are missing from the Blu-ray counterpart. Blu-ray is only about storage space. HD-DVD was at least trying to do something a little different and new.