Should You Buy A PlayStation 3?

The PlayStation 3 got off to a slow start when the console first launched in 2006. Since then, it has picked up some serious steam and has come into its own. Is now a good time to take the plunge?

The story is too old to be commented.
NYC_Gamer3106d ago

yes if u like exclusives along with other media features...

tinybigman3106d ago

This crap again? But it is kotaku so I don't expect nothing better from them.

D4RkNIKON3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

They did an article like this for all three consoles.

@below, it's kotaku so expect a slanted view of the PS3.

lovestospoodge3106d ago

sony just suspended my account for a week because of a mod i made in modnation racers, definitely!

poindat3106d ago

I'm going to have to defend Kotaku here. If you two would have read the entire article, then you would see that the author pretty much had nothing except for positive points to make about the PS3. The only hits on it was the "slow start" part (which had no bearing on the rest of the article) and about the lack of cross game chat. Which isn't a major fault by any means.

I can understand the hate that Kotaku gets when it puts out a silly and biased article as it occasionally does, but something is seriously wrong when they do nothing but sing the praises of the PS3 and they are still accused of being inherently biased. It's honestly a bit ridiculous.

WildArmed3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

The article is well written.
It's pretty much what I would say about my ps3.

And yes, if you have a 360, u don't really need a ps3.
They are both high end consoles.
Likewise, if u own a ps3.. no need for 360.

This is one of the better articles from kotaku.

you beat me to it xD

tinybigman3106d ago

i pretty much dont care for articles like these for either consoles. even if they are well written.

NecrumSlavery3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

Hey Sky,

how do you figured if you have a 360 a PS3 isn't needed? You getting LBP, Killzone 2, MGS4, Motorstorm, Heavy Rain, or even God of War on PC? Cause Mass Effect, Gears, Splinter Cell, Fable 3 are PC games too

WildArmed3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

Personally, I own both 360 n ps3.

But realistically speaking NOT everyone can afford both consoles.
And if they choose 360 as their main console over ps3, I have nothing against it.

Not EVERYONE is interested in the same thing as you, you should be able to understand that.

And you talk like EVERYONE has a PC gaming rig, not everyone does.

There is no WRONG choice in choosing a console.
Don't even try to make an argument like that.

It may be the better choice for YOU. But that's where it ends.

Again, I own both consoles. You'd be missing out on stuff if you own one or the other, that's something you have to live with.

Fable 2 was NOT on PC.
Gears 2 was NOT on PC.
halo 3 was NOT on PC.. neither is halo reach.
It's easy to list games that are on PC and 360..

You talk as if gaming is a necessity that you need to give your full attention to.. it's not.
One console can satisfy your gaming thirst. So yeah, ps3 is not NEEDED to fulfill your gaming needs. (since your talking about the ps3 specifically)

rkimoto3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

Well, I would make a set of questions to answer before "plunging" into a console/platform that I don't currently own.

1. Do I have time to play additional games?
2. Do I have the money to buy a new console/platform and its games?
3. Are there games in the other console/platform that I'm very interested in?
4. Do I have friends that have that console/platform? (applies more so for online games)
5. Does the new console/platform have features I currently don't have?

If the first 3 are "Yes" then I would seriously consider buying it. The other 2 are more subjective.

CrazzyMan3106d ago

These GAMES are already enough for justifying PS3 purchase.

Disgaea 3
Ratchet & Clank:ToD
Heavenly Sword
Valkyria Chronicles
Resistance 2
KillZone 2
Demon`s Soul
Ratchet & Clank:CiT
Uncharted 2
Heavy Rain
God of War 3

These games are not enough? Then you just don`t suit for PS3.
The only thing, is price, what would hold some people from getting this MUST HAVE console(especially when finally GT5 will be released).

cyborg69713106d ago

I think the real question is why don't you already have a ps3? kotaku is just as bad as destructurd.

SeanRL3106d ago

what mod did you make?

Nathaniel_Drake3106d ago

You got it backwards if you have a PS3/PC there is no need to get a 360. If you have only a 360 you are limiting yourself to a few games, games that you can get on the PC and the PS3

WildArmed3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

there is a difference in being well informed vs being biased. =p
I find it funny when people think the Ps3 only has 'true' exclusives.

I'm sorry for speaking in a logical manner.
I take it all back xD

Only on N4G
Where logical comments have to be followed by an apology.

Anyways, I'm outta bubbles.
So i'm outta here!
*on to the next article!*

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 3106d ago
Anon19743106d ago

When you look back at the sales, the PS3 was selling just as well as the PS2 did up to the point where the recession hit. It's still the 3rd fastest selling console in history. Why does the media still cling to that "slow sales" myth? What on earth are they even basing that on?

When you compare it to the 360, in the same time on the market the PS3 managed to move about 4 million more consoles than the 360 at twice the price, and yet we never have to hear about how the 360 got off to a "slow start."

Maybe a little fact checking is in order for ole kotaku.

LordMarius3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

It gives them hits

MaximusPrime3106d ago

funny thing is that PS3 sold more than xbox 360 at first 3 months since they both launch.

edgeofblade3106d ago

I'm really getting sick of explaining this disingenuous line of reasoning...

You can't align the launches of two consoles and expect to have a shred of statistical significance. Only the current install bases matter. For example, when a third party decides which consoles to develop for, they don't artificially shift the launches. They look at the numbers right now.

Long story short, the only people who care about who did better when you compare the first 4 months are certified fanboys... because not a single business decision relies on that particular metric.

Christopher3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

***For example, when a third party decides which consoles to develop for, they don't artificially shift the launches. They look at the numbers right now. ***

That's actually not true.

Essentially what you're saying is that developers should have looked only at the 6 million people who owned a 360 at the release of the PS3 versus the few hundred thousand who owned a PS3.

What they do is analyze the growth ratios, attach rates, and level of effort to determine the profitability of putting a game onto the console. This will lead to a long-term goal of producing games for each platform and not just a "Okay, Console A has 10 million and Console B 4 million, let's only put it on Console A" for a game that will take at least 1 year of development work to produce.

Part of that analysis is predictive growth analysis, which becomes more applicable after a certain term of release. Meaning, you predict the rate and expected growth measure of each console, which takes into account their month-by-month sales statistics, regardless of current totals. Analyzing these will show if a console's growth is expected to reach that point of profitability as well as a possible larger market share within a certain period of growth. This analysis is broken down by region, as well.

Furthermore, the reason for taking early titles to a new console are not just for the expectation of similar profits to a console already released but are to A) establish development procedures for developing multiplatform titles and B) establish your games, name, and similar branding elements on both platforms to reach the largest consumer market.

***Long story short, the only people who care about who did better when you compare the first 4 months are certified fanboys... because not a single business decision relies on that particular metric. ***

Again, incorrect. While those specific months aren't looked at for decisions right now, they are included in the overall predictive growth analysis. Which console performs better in terms of continual growth on a month-to-month basis is extremely important to their financial outlook and planning.

The fact that the PS3 has a faster growth rate compared to the 360 is a huge factor considering the market it entered to and the additional technology that is provided with it (Blu-ray). The same can be said of the Nintendo Wii and motion-based gaming. The opposite can be said of the Xbox 360 in that it had a lead over both and has been unable to maintain or extend their lead through similar key franchises (Nintendo) or technology (Nintendo and PS3).

Microsoft is hoping for Natal to be their technological advancement that will leap them beyond the PS3's grasp and will lead them into the next generation of consoles where they can continue to lead over Sony's products and look forward to competing against Nintendo. The more people that use Natal and thereby the Xbox 360, the greater chance of control they have over digital media and HD media capabilities, which are also core to their goals as a business.

WildArmed3106d ago

lol from what i understand, ps3 is selling faster than it's previous two installments (ps1 and ps2)..
soo.. yeah..
Slow? i dont think so

rkimoto3106d ago

Yeah, I think they're mistakingly refering to selling slower compared to the Wii, which in it by itself depends if on your point of view the comparison is valid or not.

If compared to previous Playstation iterations then Sony is doing just fine, specially when you consider that it had a higher launch price and its direct competitor launched a year earlier.

But I guess it's difficult to write and research at the same time.

Anon19743106d ago

We've had this conversation before and you're delusional. He repeatidly argues that it doesn't matter that the PS3 has sold more units than the 360 head 2 head since they launched, and it doesn't matter that the PS3 has crushed the 360 in sales if you align their launches. All that matters is that lead because the 360 was out first.

Well, what happens when the PS3 overtakes the 360 this year? Then what will your excuse be. Bottom line is the 360's sales performance has paled in comparison to what the PS3 has accomplished.

And you never even attempted to address my question. Why is the PS3 considered to have had a slow sales start but the same criticism is never leveled at the 360 despite the fact that it's sold much slower than the PS3? Answer me that.

The notion that the PS3 suffered from "slow sales" is baseless, and if you level this criticism at the PS3 but give the 360 a pass then you're hypocritical.

Persistantthug3105d ago

Because it isn't just about "where there at now" that determines what publishers/developers think of a certain console and where and how to delegate resources.

Publishers also do their own forecasting based on year over year numbers to detect's part of business.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3105d ago
Lfmesquite3106d ago

YEEEEEEESSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

poindat3106d ago

You could honestly say this for either console.... But there was just something about the allure of Sony's already released exclusives and promised exclusives that just compelled me to buy a PS3 back in 2007. And they sure as hell have lived up to their promises. The PS3's exclusives fit my interests and gaming habits so incredibly well; perhaps its the diversity or the audiences that Sony targets, but the PS3 constantly has me saving up money to buy the next exclusive game or pouring over its features and news here on N4G. The biggest decision factor on purchasing a console should be its exclusives; the games that truly justify your purchase.

Some publishers may be saying that exclusives now have less relevance in the grand scheme of things, but I believe that it is quite the opposite. With so many great multiplatform titles available, a console needs to have an amazing exclusive line up to give it that extra edge. And the PS3 just manages to do that for me.

Boody-Bandit3106d ago

Pretty silly title but then again it is Kotaku

n4gno3106d ago

kotaku = what a joke (paid by ms)

" Is now a good time to take the plunge?"

lol, same ridiculous/troll strategy than xbot talking about 1 future game like THE reason to buy the console, when we have 1000 reasons, since more than 3 years to buy it...when you are a gamer.

pangitkqb3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

With Blu-ray, free online, blu-tooth, built-in wireless, and a solid library - both multi-platform and exclusives - now is the time to "jump in" to a PS3.

I love my 360 too, but this is a PS3 article.

Persistantthug3106d ago

If you're a gamer, the question should be "WHY HAVEN'T YOU bought a PS3...........



cliffbo3106d ago

it should read should we read kotaku?.

Nathaniel_Drake3106d ago (Edited 3106d ago )

sucks you don't have any more bubbles, but what is illogical about my statement. If you have a good PC and a PS3 what is the point of buying the 360 right now. I'm not being biased. Only a few games are there, and the value of the 360 lowers everytime a game comes out for it that is on the PC and the 360. Where is the logic in that? You do not make any sense. PS3 not having true exclusives, I am not about to list for the billionth time this list of PS3 games that you can only experience on the PS3, not on the PC. I'm not saying if you buy a 360 you are wrong you probably love some exclusives it has, but the value of the system is just not there.

I am thinking that's why they are adding Natal to it, to increase it's value. I mean c'mon Mass Effect 1 and 2 which are great games that are supposed to define the 360 as a variety console are now on the PC also. Out of all of your post you still have not made any sense with the value of the PS3.

Quagmire3106d ago

"yes if u like exclusives along with other media features... "

I like it. Simple, easy to remember

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 3105d ago
poindat3106d ago

How so? This was a very reasonable and informative article. Maybe you should reserve your claims for the actual flood of crap that comes through N4G rather than this particular article.

UNCyrus3106d ago

Correction... It's reasonable and informative FOR kotaku

JD_Shadow3106d ago

Actually, the only thing I question is their notion of if you have a 360, you shouldn't buy a PS3 because one HD console is enough. Everything else seemed to be correct, though we may not like the facts on some of them. I do think Sony will decide to add the headset at a later date as part of a bundle with the PS3.

n4gno3106d ago

It's clearly biased, like always..every gamers knows that if you have, or had an xbox, it's time (since more than 3 years) to change and buy the best hd console (with bluray, battery on controlers, internet browsers, free online, better exclusives, etc)..if you can afford one off course.

just an evidence they are trying to ignore, pathetic trolltaku.

dizzleK3106d ago Show
Brewski0073106d ago

Plain and simple. I like your style. Yes listen to this guy.

Prcko3106d ago

Defenetly YEESSS!!!
Best console on market!!!