Scutt Farkas

you do know that you can get 2 gigs of ram for 50 dollars and an 8800 gts for 114 dollars, right?

everyone shut up about multithousand dollar computers. you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. i hate that shit. the 8800 gts is 114.99 on newegg. you can get a core2duo 45 nm 2.5 ghz for 199 on newegg too. those 2 components right there turn your pc into a sick gaming pc. you are all idiots. good lord. with those two components, its under 1000 to build the entire pc. and those are 2 HIGH END components. idiots. it ISNT thousands of dollars, its not 2003 anymore.

lol!

and, i just feel obligated to say that crysis wasn't the flop everyone thinks it was. i cant wait to buy the game, but i'm gonna do so in a few months when the 9 series of cards come out and i upgrade. my 3 pc gaming friends are also waiting to upgrade to buy it. i have a feeling thats what most people are doing. because no pc's now can play it on full specs. no matter what anyone says, unless then have SLI 8800 ultras or can live with 20 fps. but. yeah. just wanted to throw that out there.

im really getting tired of hearing how the cell processor is gonna tackle games and make everything it's bitch and sure, the ps3 can play crysis cause it has the cell processor! alright. you all know the PROCESSORS aren't the only factor working when playing game? ram, and the gpu have just as important a role. both of which the ps3 has mediocre and on par with the 360. the cell can't do any more than its graphics card and ram can do, so shut the hell up about it being able to do so much. and crysis can't play on very high settings remotely smoothly with an 8800 gtx, and that card makes the 360 and ps3 graphics cards it's BITCHES. so. can't happen. unless the graphics are severely turned down. which wouldn't be the end of the world. i guess.

look at all those ps3 games.

my sony vaio has the quake 4 symbol semi-burned into the screen, because i tried loading quake 4, it froze, and we went on vacation and i forgot to turn it off. like 768 mb ram, integrated gma950. p4 with *gasp* hyperthreading!

you didn't touch a nerve. i just like being a jackass. and to the guy who said you don't have any of the 3 games, what do you want? a medal? obviously i didn't assume everyone owned them? and people who review games and say things like, more technologically advanced, could be basing it on nothing. what's more technologically advanced about it. what does it do that's so show stopping? thats all i was originally asking. it's not a question of whether credibility went into that statement. it's just, "more technologically advanced" could mean a myriad of things. and hey. if it's good (and part of me hopes it will be so i can justify a ps3 in part) then hooray!

hey 24. nice job winning an argument that no one was having. i was asking what was more technologically advanced about the game killzone 2. not the ps3. but good job sounding like i've been backed into a corner. UM ANYMORE QUESTIONS!? DUR ILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM! DUR! but seriously. the ps3 does have more stuff in it than the 360. i never made that argument. but. uh. thanks for the info.

and also. um. what the hell do you mean by "most technologically advanced". what the hell are the pre-requisites for that? or did you just uh. feel like calling it that? and 2nd. no. it is not catching up to the 360. halo 3, bioshock, and gears of war. (all shooters, you haters) are ALL MUST HAVE games. the ps3 has none. and don't you dare say resistance. killzone 2, mgs4 and ff13 might all be must-havers. but thats yet to be seen. isn't it.