Does the PS3 really have bad games?
The results... Xbox 360 has 7.8 times as many 8/10 games exclusive to their console.
There's a long way to go, but for now, the claim that PS3 doesn't have many good games, is true.
no worries. :)
The PS3 will get more games.
No need to worry present/future PS3 owners:)
I'm not worried,Heavenly Sword,Lair,Warhawk,Uncharted:) etc.
Even though I'll be EXTREMELY BROKE after that period of time:)
Go stand in the corner and stay there until Sony says it's ok to come out...
Thegamesarecoming!Thegamesarec oming!Thegamesarecoming!Thegame sarecoming!Thegamesarecoming!Th egamesarecoming!Thegamesarecomi ng!Thegamesarecoming!Thegamesar ecoming!Thegamesarecoming!Thega mesarecoming!Thegamesarecoming! Thegamesarecoming!Thegamesareco ming!Thegamesarecoming!
yeh the PS3 will get games, but with them talking about exclusive ones i can only see them pulling out infront of MS/Xbox 360 when the install base is much higher, and they get to know the cell processor alot better, and i cant see this happening untill late 2009, especially soon as though games like Killzone 2 have been in development for 2 years already.
not unless people start buying the console to entice developers to make them. i honestly don't think sony (or microsoft for that matter) will have ANY 3rd party exclusives this round. it just doesn't make financial sense for publishers. without big 3rd party exclusives (and no, ff and mgs aren't enough), the ps3 is just a more-expensive 360 with a movie player noone wants.
Of course the ps3 will get games, it hasnt even been out a year. Developers are just getting to grips with how powerful the damn thing is. This year is for the 360 (alot of great games). Next year we should see the ps3 in all its glory (hopefully). If you dont agree 'fair enough' but any gamer could see this happening.
Yeah lets compare who has more games with 2 consoles who came out a year apart.
than when all the PS2 games got compared to all the Xbox 1 games.
Hehe.. on the source site someone ask the very same question you ask (PS3 fans think alike).... and someone reply...
"Well, they're always going to be a year apart. When do you suggest we compare them?" so true... I just realised you always going to have the same excuse...
Bladestar, its abit like a 30 year old dating an 18 year old saying when I'm 90 she'll be 78 and the age difference wont be as big. You're right theres always going to be the 1 year difference but perhaps comparing when PS3 is 2 and Xbox is 3 would be a little fairer than comparing in the first 6 months. PS3 needs games badly but Xbox has hardly released anything good this year as well. (We dont have Forza yet).
Just my 2 cents kids, I dont want to lose bubbles over it.
PS. Speaking of Forza, has anyone got it? Can you change the control layout?
You do realize THAT is why microsoft pushed so hard to get the 360 out then right? I mean...seriously...that is PART OF THEIR STRATEGY. Comon. Of COURSE you are supposed to compare who has more games right now. WHY ELSE RELEASE A SYSTEM A YEAR IN ADVANCE? Sony knew about this situation coming in.
That said...A year from now the PS3 should have as many good games as the 360 does now. The question being will they be good enough to make up the difference for the games the 360 will have by then. I'm personally thinking the difference won't be nearly as noticable by then and they will be on more equal footing. And we'll get a better idea what the ps3 is all about by then.
Have you actually been alive this year until now? Lots of good games have been released! Crackdown, Lost Planet, and loads more XBLArcade titles.
And, there were more exclusive games out for the 360 which recieved high scores, at the time of it's launch. We have only seen Resistance and Motorstorm at the moment which have actually recieved high scores in their reviews.
And the Xbox has always had the best games anyway.
Not many of the XBOX360 titles had any competition to be compared to while reviewing the games. A lot of the Playstation 3 "ports" suffer from the comparison to the 360 since, obviously Playstation 3 ports have been lack-luster.
Wait until the end of this year and compare again. Oh, and take the games LESS than 8 into account, you'll be surprised.
WAT OTHER GAME THAT IS OUT THAT IS GOOD ON XBOX...PLZ SPARE ME THE FANBOYISM...THATS IT....YOU GUYS ARE W8ing for games just like ps3 owners..wheres halo..too human..masseffect...plz guys stop being fanboys just admit both there first years suck and they both will have killer year twos...360 is great and ps3 is great cant we agree on that and say the Wii sucks..WHY CANT IT DO HD.... we have ps360 love...Lets bust the chops of nintendo fanboys on here which dont exist apparently at least not on here..Or agree to disagree
I agree with someone with a PS3 logo, thats true, both systems are great, and yea screw the wii..lol! :)
Lets join forces and defeat the real threat to the advancement of technology.....the Nintendo Wii! All the 360 fans and PS3 fans are at each others throats while the last gen Nintendo Wii is selling out and nobody is noticing. Join forces and defeat this threat to HD capable graphics and performance!!!!
Yea I agree dude Ill stop flaming and join forces as well.
My best friends a PS3 fanboy and im a 360 fanboy and were cool with it ill do the same thing on this site. PS360!!!
yea i think this is the most worthless piece of garbage i heard all day. why approve this sh!T??? everybody knows that the ps3 has way less games and has only been out for like what is it now 7-8 months
The 360 has been out for nearly 2 years.
Of course it has more games with decent review scores, especially with the review bias these days toward anything MS.
Defjam icon (absolute teenage kiddie crap)
Virtua Fighter 5 (highly polished king of TRUE skilled 3d fighters)
Check out crapspots scores on the 360 icon and ps3 VF5, and have a good ol larf.
Actually, I think the reason the 360 gets better reviews on the multiplats is largely due to its' polished online features. Often the game is identical on both platforms but because of the online features, the 360 wins out. Sometimes the ps3 version doesn't have any online support at all. The achievement system is a differentiator also. The reviewer would be negligent if he ignored these facts. Don't worry, as the ps3 online gets on it's feet this will even out.
As for all the people going on about the time advantage, sony actually seemed to be ahead of MS hardware development-wise in summer '05 but Sony's decision to bundle blu-ray and MS's decision to not bundle hd-dvd gave MS the lead time. Sony could have entered the market shoulder to shoulder with MS if they weren't going all trojan on us; now that decision is hurting them to the point where it's conceivable that they won't retake the lead. Either way, next gen game development started on both platforms at about the same time. I think that the longer learning curve for the ps3 is largely responsible for the meager number of titles out right now and in the near future.
MS played it's gambit and it seems to have worked out for them. Whether the sony gambit will work out or not will be revealed over time.
Ha i get a disagree for an LOL and the funny part is that they don't even know what the LOL was for(LOL)
LOl PS3 will have many good games.
what a joke..lol..the 360 have more games its obvious..ps3 barely came out like 5 months ago..and the ps3 bein hard to program for is makin it hard for game devlopers right now to make good lookin games for it...i know for sure it will all change in a year because they will get used to it and gain more experience...i wouldnt be surprise if they put games on the ps3 as their lead platform..ps3 have loads of game and when it drop all the xbots will be quiet..
So then why release teh damn console last year. Should have waited for the freaking games to be made first. Anyway in E3 05 they should bunch of demos, so wtf happend to them, 2 years and still no games. Stop justifying dumping ur however earned money on this expensive heater.
A couple of mitigating factors:
Some of those high-rated 360 games are downloads from Live, not on-the-shelf titles. Playstation Network hasn't yet matched the quality of Live, but it's still in its infancy.
360 still has the advantage of a one-year head start. Give the PS3 another year and I suspect it'll have a better lineup of high-rated titles. Of course, by then the 360 will have even more highly rated titles, but I think there will be a better balance.
The best way to compare the ratings of each system's games is to compare games available for both (Oblivion, for example). 360 still has an edge there, but not as much.
Now, truthfully, the PS3 is currently suffering from a dearth of quality games. There just aren't very many good titles for the system, and that--along with the price point--is what's holding the system back. With a couple of exceptions (Lair, for example....drooooool) there's not much on the horizon for the PS3 until the fall season arrives.
like which girl are more beautiful, if you ask people in my country, they would answer that ps3 games are better than 360...
you think oblivion is the best game? it is the best seller game... but dude, no body like that game here...
that score is scored by which country??? that's different story... scoring is terrible... I never believe media for 100%
when they said is bad... i said it not bad... when they said its good... I don't feel any good at all.
Thats a realist point of view i can respect. You won't find too many post from me saying PS3 will lack in great titles in the future. I'm thinking popular opinion has swayed greatly out of of PlayStations favor; not allowing Sony to rule with a Iron fist. It will be about stradigy and innovation and what company knows how to make their products appeal beyond gaming( Home entertainment services/features and economics Aptitude will also dictate the dominate stadigy.
comparing RFOM with halo 3 BETA is ok
sony fanboys gimme a break
Retarted post and comparison.
OMG what is that useless article ?!?!
Lol no, its not.
@bloodmask- lol the sonysuckers are drain some bubbles for that, so heres some bubbles for you sir.
Quote from engineer:
And it sucks to be a consumer with such companies being the “technology leaders”. ... The Cell processor wasn’t designed for games. Just ask IBM. ...
then what the hell is Motorstorm? An interactive movie?? o_o' Oh Noez! We've been tr-icked.
people like bloodmask are just silly, what they fail to see is that the cell is changing the ways games are currently designed so of course its not designed to run games in their current structure.
They'll never tell you how the CBE uses the FLEX-IO port to act as a giant GPU with the RSX. Many knowledgeable posters and developers even more so have been talking about all the secret weapons this architecture provides while the 360 is still stuck in it's let's just beef up the CPU/GPU pc mentality and calling it next gen.
Kutaragi tried to interest Jobs in adopting the Cell microprocessor, which is being developed by IBM for use in the coming PlayStation 3, in exchange for access to certain Sony technologies. Jobs rejected the idea, telling Kutaragi that he was disappointed with the Cell design, which he believed would be even less effective than the Power PC.
It's not coming to the desktop market and was never meant to. There are a lot of architectures that are designed just for networking, database, and server requirements. The Cell is one of these.
Sony found out the hard way it sucks as a general purpose cpu. They were only banking on using the cell by itself to do all the graphics processing like they did with the emotion engine in the PS2... they got 75% done and went 'Crap this thing sucks at this' and had to slap on the nvidia gpu.
The Cell I believe, is over-rated. Most of the processors that IBM releases are targeted towards the Server end of the market and not for the general consumer. The Cell processor is a great idea, but general purpose processors like the Core 2 Duo and AMD Athlon X2 i believe are faster the the Cell processor
The "mighty" Cell - blown away by nVidia
8th December 2004, by Paul, 372 words, 134 views
Categories: Gaming, Technology
We all heard the talk, that the Cell processor would wipe away all before it. Of course anyone with any knowledge of this kind of technology would see it for what it is, more Sony bullshit. Remember the PS2?
1000 times the power of any PC. 66Gb/s of memory bandwidth. Toy Story graphics in real time. And such & such.
The same kind of outrageous claims were made with this Cell processor which is developed by IBM, Toshiba, and Sony. They claim this to be completely "revolutionary". It's not, you can clearly see it's relation to the Playstation 2's processor. In that it's basically lots of weak processors bolted together, the fundamental reason the Playstation 2 is so insanely difficult to develop for and why developers are dropping it and shifting focus to the Microsoft Xbox 360. Which like all Microsoft platforms is notoriously fast and simple to develop for. Allowing developers to spend more time creating decent games instead of struggling to try and get their software to even work.
Just days ago the official press release about this Cell thing was released. The Sony fanboys started cheering, I guess they just never learn do they - and what should happen just yesterday? nVidia released a statement saying their graphics processors would feature in the Playstation 3 and other Sony products.
What happened to the mighty Cell? Sony now have to back-off saying the Cell is not all mighty, and require a seperate GPU to handle graphics, yes it's 1000 times more powerful then any PC today, right that's why it can't perform GPU-like operations on it. They need a PC manufacturer to remotely stand a chance of coming up with a better graphics processor then their extremely lacking PS2. The hypocracy! Just a few years ago they were blasting the Xbox because of it using PC hardware, it featured an nVidia NV2A chip (which at the time they seemed to think was a bad thing). Of course nVidia have since been replaced by ATi, as the performance/quality graphics leader of the PC market, ATi winning the contract to develop the GPU for the Xbox 2, which they have now completed.
Sony are still lagging behind. Good luck with your Playstation 3, you're going to need it.
I could start off with the usual "where did you copy that idiotic crap from?!", but I think your answer will just end up making you look even more foolish. I know that..deep down inside you're trying hard to make sense, but posting "Cell is not all mighty, and require[s] a [separate] GPU to handle graphics" was not exactly the wisest decision. Then again, I guess every site needs a village idiot.
PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii all have separate CPUs and GPUs. PS3 just has the benefit of having a CPU that does pretty much everything (including GPU functions), and does it well. Just ask Xbox 360 developer Team Ninja, or ex-Nintendo developer Factor 5.
Bubbles and applause for you, well thought out and written.
RE: 17.4 Go to school.
Your fanboyism is not needed, save it for days in with mommy, unless you can act like a normal person, and comment in a normal way!
Looks like Microsofts plan on coming out a year before the ps3 is working perfectly. Not only does the 360 already have a huge list of highly rated games, the ps3 hasn't shown any advantage in graphics or gameplay in coming out a year later. In fact, the 360 continueously gets the better versions of most multiplatform games (Rainbow 6: Vegas is the recent winner for the 360) Yes the ps3 will get better games eventually...but they wont catch up to the 360s already huge list of great and classic games, and it keeps on GROWING!
what are u talking about? the gameplay of Motorstorm is so intensive. you won't have that kind of feeling in Forza 2 or let's say..Dirt.
before commenting on that which you do not know. You only show ignorance when you do so. Forza 2's hundreds of hours of gameplay has more depth than Motorstorm ever will. Is it the prettiest game? No, but it does look awesome running. You cannot top the simulation the game provides.
all this is getting me really confused about which console to get. I guess i'll just wait a year
all this is getting me really confused about which console to get. I guess i'll just wait a year
(accident sorry abt sthe double posting)
First off, I'd like to say thanks for reading the article. Second, I understand your comments.
I partially made the article in response to this article: http://www.sonyprotectiongr...
I realize that the PS3 hasn't been out more than a year, but as I said in my previous comment, "Well, they're always going to be a year apart. When do you suggest we compare them?" Now, I know most would say next year. By that time, the Xbox 360 will have many more great games, as will the PS3...but how many PS3 games can you name that will be out in the next year that will topple these numbers?
I will do another comparison later, but I thought it was interesting to reply to the thoughts that "PS3 games are not bad games." No, they're not bad; you could just play better version on the XBox 360.
I have a PS3, so I'm not just spewing fanboy-ness. I really want the PS3 to do great and I can't WAIT for all the games coming to it in the next year. I also have a Wii, but...I didn't want to embarass them too much. For the kids' sake :)
lol some of that is Bs I mean Resistance look very good i mean come on ps3 doing great for start ps3 got resistance and 360 got Prefect dark.and when ps3 games come out the sell will start to pick up and probly stay up and same with 360 but the ps3 got more title that still need to be realeased so in the long run it will be close but nether of them r going to just kill the other system in sells.And yes the ps3 will catch but it might win it might not we still got lots games for both system to come out with.But what ever comes out it will be a fight to the finsh.
Castlevania: Symphony of the Night 2007 90
Guitar Hero II 2007 93
13 Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved 2005 86
16 Elder Scrolls IV: Knights of the Nine, The 2006 86
28 Hexic HD 2005 82
35 Football Manager 2006 2006 81
38 Catan 2007 81
39 Uno 2006 81
44 Cloning Clyde 2006 81
52 Doom 2006 80
What is up with these games?
Hey, I just copied from metacritic.com
If PS3 had any weird games that scored above 8/10, they would've been there. Sadly...they don't.
Knights of the Nine is in ps3 version of Oblivion and it has been listed as x360 separated, exclusive game for $9.99. Big LOL
if u think the 360 is a true HD gaming system ur on crack
look at the games that are coming out within the FIRST! ya u bots ur reading that correct FIRST! year...and i dont have to name them since ur always looking them up on google drooling over the graphics and wishing ur 360 could do what those games are doing in the first year of the PS3 life cycle.
like honestly these game look better then 360 2 year titles lol like how hurting of a system is that - a year head start and games still look like crap and ALWAYS! look soo doll and cloudy
laugh all u want - but when games for the 360 have to be 3-4 disc and ur buying more towels then games because of ur garbage system breaking down- - ill be playing the most stunning games ever created
start flame wars like this thread an that MGS4 thread ... this crap is soooo lame. Half of what's being said in here is nothing more then fanboy rhetoric. That goes for both sides of the fence.
Like i said Blu ray causes tha Graphics to not run full power which makes PS3 less realistic
PS3 is doing great
At least I am playing games with my 360, and that is what matters to me.
It’s known that there are some Killer PS3 games coming out and on the same note the Xbox360 also has a list of Killer games coming out. While we can sit and debate all day long over which games are better and for what system, it doesn’t matter because in the end certain games will appeal to certain gamers and they will buy the game for that system. This still doesn’t change the fact that Microsoft will be releasing titles to compete with almost every title Sony releases (if the title is good enough to compete or not, is a different story). So I don’t see the gap getting any smaller. I’m sure the fact that the PS3’s sales remain lower than the Xbox360’s doesn’t help matters (3rd party publishers pushing project development dates back for the PS3). Making excuses or reasons for not comparing the system is silly. While the PS3 has great future potential it does very little in the present when many of us want to play games now, and let’s not forget if potential is determined by games the Xbox360 also has potential it has not tapped into yet. While some will curse me for saying that but the fact remains that the Xbox360 must appeal to someone hint the sales numbers are still better than the PS3. http://www.newsfactor.com/s...
That was the best comment in this thread. Thanks for understanding what I believe.
Now i have gone round reading many artices about which one is better PS3 or the 360 ,i am just clearing things up, which many people seem to get wrong.
I own a ps2 and a PC and to be honest i was sort of a playstation fanboy. But after reading many sites about the PS3's showing at E3 and researching on the differences between the two, i was disappointed. ME being a PC enthusiast iv tried to compare the 2 consoles.
1)Now say you were building a PC and it was the best PC around. You had the best parts CPU ,Motherboard,ect...Except one thing ram, you have a measily 256mb of ram, now will that cope with your super computer? No.Its the same problem as te PS3 compared to the xbox 360 it only has 48.2gb/s while the xbox 360 has 278.4b/s which means it can process more data quicker than the PS3 therefore better graphics.
2)Not to mention the custom ATI graphics with 24 pixel pipelines in the 360 is far better than the RSX has 12 pixel pipelines in the PS3 which only just beats the 7800gtx(ive heard),and yes even though the RSX has 50mhs clockspeed more than the 360 it wont make a difference.Plus a graphics card better than the RSX, nvidia said will be available shortly after the PS3 launches so you could have better graphics than a PS3 but for your PC! So much for 'new technology'.
3)Now to move on the CPU, the Cell has only one PPE to the IBM's Xenon's three, which means that developers will have to cram all their game control, AI, and physics code into at most two threads that are sharing a very narrow execution core with no instruction window. Not forgeting that the cell processor was only produced for multimedia, not gaming. While the xenon CPU was made for specificaly gaming.
4)As i said me reding all these articles people always seem to talk about how many teraflops the ps3 produces and how much the 360 produces which if read at http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... doesn't actually make much of a difference in the real world.
5)Price, need i say more the PS3 will incorprate a blue ray player but to be honest, that wont really make a differnence except that it will have more storage, which realy sony only put in blue ray so it would gain a better chance of winning the next gen disks war (hd- dvd and blue ray disks) and just bumps up the price by another $200.
6)Everyones been talking about the controllers and how that the Ps3 is designed for 'longer gaming' but seeing that they are connected via bluetooth any mobile phone made in the past 1 1/2 years will interfear with at least 1 of the controllers, at least microsoft have thought of these problems and chose the wi-fi option.
7)Now a gamers community is one of the most important things in a console and what is this? xbox live. Ps3 will be releasing internet based such as xbox live, but there is no way they can match xbox live as it is so well developed. We'll just have to wiat and see .
overall, both consoles are high quality gaming machines for HD gaming, but if you crunch up the numbers xbox 360 even though released before the PS3, is technically better than PS3. Not many people believe that if they saw them next to each other, but comparing the components individually is pointless, its what happens when all the pieces work together that counts. for more information and detailed graphs of the real time performance of the PS3 and the xbox 360 look up http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/a...
you sound so deperate....at the end of the day, they both look about equal. there isnt a big difference in graphics like last gen.(ps2 vs xbox) just remember who is really going to win this gen of gaming, nintendo and their gamecube version2.
your first point aint right: the 278.4 gb/s is nog for the whole memory: this is the speed of only 10MB of RAM
second point ain't right either, The Xbox 360 GPU IS better, but it's not twice as fast as you say it is...
third point, we all know (PS3 and Xbox360 owners/fanboys) that the Cell is a CPU TWICE as fast as the Xbox 360 CPU.. so don't come here to tell us something we already know is not true...
fourth point.. okay no comment about that... (wikipedia is always right :P)
fifth point.. besides the fact that I like to use my PS3 as a (Blu-ray-) movie player:P... The Bluray player makes the console expensive, true, but I think it's worth it! Games are getting larger and this was the most logical thing for sony to do: put their own next-gen storage device into the console... There are already games announced that are incredebly large, DVD will be a bottleneck for that type of games (GTA IV, MGS4 though it doesnt come out on dvd, and many more to come)
6th is bull... I've played lots of time with my sixaxis and I haven't had trouble with mobile phones...
7.. Live is good, PSN is good too... If you can have a game with 40 player MP without lag there's nothing wrong with the network.
oh yeah there's an 8th point: The PS3 is much more stable then the Xbox360... more quality parts and it doesn't brick when it overheats (like a lot of 360's do)
overall is the Ps3 better, but at the moment the Xbox360 has more and better games...
by the way... I bet you have a 360, or you don't have any clue what you're talking about...
Yesterday I took back Motostorm and Resistence (never played them through because in my opinion they are good but not great and I bought a bunch of ps2 games instead. I also bought Virtua Fighter 5 which I think is a great game but heck... The ps3 has hardly any good games atm but it does have some nice games coming. Only I feel myself saying the saying thing over and over again but they havn't come yet :(
don't be like that, games will come you know it, and it will only take one game to keep you hooked for a long time. and by the time you're finished with that game you'll have lots of other good games.
The first few months are the hardest, but you can rest assured that the ps3 is an excelent option.It came a year after xbox, it's natural that it will be better.
My first months with the xbox 360 were quite the same as yours,i was a little down by them, cause nothing really cought my eye.or i was a little afraid to buy some game cause it didn't seem to be my type of game.but then gears came... and i have by far more than 400 hours of gameplay and i don't get enough of it. I just sit there on the sofa at 8 am, start playing and just finish playing at 4 am. i eat,shint,masturbate,and pee on the freaking couch, and when i wake up on the next day all i want do is play some more.I love some of the other games i have, but i just feel like playing that one, i can't get enough of it.
it will be like this to you too, playstation is a well know brand, it won't disappoint you, you'll be hooked up to it all day long, don't mind it too much.It seems to have a wider variety of game genres also, so you're bound to find something you'll really love.
You should also try ,if you haven't already, playing online, it ads so much to a game's value.
I will try ps3 online tomorrow :D
The ps3 would crash my old router so I bought a brand new D-link DGL-4300! which is coming tomorrow... Too bad VF5 has no online play lol :(
Anyway.. Yeah I know the games will come, I just want them now!!!!!!
Goes back to playing FF12.....
Oh, internets. You've disappointed me once again.
Can I be bluntly honest; I try not to be bias; IMO opinion the PS3 has thus far not shown anything that makes me go WOW; but for the 1st time I see a game that makes me think yes the PS3 can perform after all, the game is Heavenly Swo