I’m really tired of American’s moaning about the price tag of the PS3. I live in England and will have to part with £425 ($830) for the 60Gb console, and there’s no 20Gb alternative. Plus its not as though Sony is making any money on the consoles it sells in the US, if anything they’re losing about $100 on every machine sold. Plus consider the money you have to spend yearly to use Xbox Live, the PlayStation Network is free to use.
The Xbox360 is a great gaming console, yet if you want to have a future proof gaming/entertainment console than the PS3 is the best choice. If you want to upgrade the Xbox360 to contend with what the PS3 offers you need to buy a HD-DVD player, wireless adapter, rechargeable batteries for the control pad, bigger HDD etc. After you’ve done all that the $600 doesn’t seem to bad.
As far as games go, there are more likely hundreds of games in the pipeline for PS3, far more than the 13 AOL are suggesting, just look on IGN or Gamespot. Additionally, the free Grand Tourismo HD and all the other games that are soon to be released for the PlayStation Network store.
I’m taking an objective view here, unlike many of the commenter’s oppinions I read. People just need to keep an open mind and stop picking on the easy target. Lets face it, who would say no if they were given a PS3?

Let me start by saying, I hold no allegiance to any company or product. My purchases are based solely on research and value.

In hunting for the right console I’ve stumbled across a ton of anti-Sony sentiment from sites that claim to be journalistic (which should mean non-biased), and opinion pieces that are based in some fantasy world where the PS3 doesn’t beat the DVD doors off the Wii and XBOX 360 in potential and value.

It’s really sad to see such immaturity in the reporting for an industry with such potential. The Gaming industry is held back by the foot soldiers representing it, the reporters, reviewers, store clerks, and so on.

As far as the PS3 console goes, it truly is the best value of the three.

Consider the Wii’s lack of system power, Nintendo will most likely replace the Wii within a few years. At $200-250, there is a total expenditure of $4-500 for old technology with limited capabilities.

XBOX 360, now this is a powerful console, a powerful console that was rushed to market. Remember when the XBOX 360 was to include, TiVO, HD-DVD, HDD, 802.11G, etc., etc. Now they are all peripherals ranging anywhere from $40-$200 a piece. Doesn’t anyone realize that puts the cost of an XBOX 360 well over that of a PS3, therefore making the PS3 a better value? And XBOX Live is a pay per month service, need I go on?

PS3 includes all the next-gen gaming must-haves and offers its online service for free making it a value well beyond its price tag.

Let’s grow up and quit with the biased reporting, it’s childish and petty. No wonder this industry isn’t taken seriously, it’s eyes and ears are those of a bunch of twenty or thirty-something children.

Nice to hear some sensible comments for once instead of all the Sony bashing that gets done out of nothing more than envy.

The PS3 is only just starting out the blocks the xbox 360 has a year head start. Look back in a year and the ps3 will have eclipsed the xbox 360 which in my opinion has already reached its peak for what the system has to offer. The PS3 is already at the 360 level with a year to go. Personnaly i cant wait to look back and laugh to myself over all this.

Oh and did any one catch the UK programme watch dog, see what it has to say about the 360 he he

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cons...s/consumer_20070213.shtml

In the War of the Game Consoles, Microsoft looks like it will only be the leader in wasting time and money. They lost a reported 4 Billion dollars on the original XBox and it looks like they will undoubtedly following suit with the 360. What they should have done was release the 360 with HDMI & internal HD-DVD or Blu-ray player from day 1. Even if Microsoft adds HDMI to the 360, they still need to release at least one more system that is equipped with an internal HD drive, whether it be HD-DVD or Blu-ray. It’s obvious, after 2 outings, Microsoft lacks the Vision nessessary to win the gaming War. Because of Microsoft’s major 360 blunder, it seems to me that Sony’s PS3 will completely own the High Definition gaming industry by 2008. Also remember that PS3 is equipped with HDMI 1.3a (dD 7.1/1440p) which puts PS3 in the lead, technologically speaking, by about 12 years. You read it correctly, 1440p!!! 1080p is a thing of the past. and it looks like… so is the 360.

4 me to accept ps3 reach 360 level, they would need a game t@ beat gears of war in every corner.Otherwise 4k gaystation 3.

I definitely disagree with this article and feel that it’s porrly argued, especially the lack of software.

I couldn’t care less what AOL says about a piece of gaming hardware, i seem to remember them being VOTED the worst ISP for gaming in this country (UK) many years on the trot. Putting a AOL CD into your computer was akin to ripping the memory out of it, as it never worked correctly after that. I know as i fixed bloody hundreds of them after said AOL CD was inserted and a subscription was not purchased. Anyone who writes the PS3 off so early on is IMO just guessing, as it’s impossible to predict what will happen to any of the three consoles as this is uncharted territory we are in with 2 power consoles (PS3 + Xbox360) versus the unusual Wii.

All i know is roll on March 23rd and i will have to gr8 consoles then the PS3 and Xbox360 and i will be a happy gamer then.

aol is right ps3 nlows i love wii and 360 better

a lot of people dont even have hd tv so blu ray is pointless to them thats y 360 isnt chargeing u a lot to have it built in u can have it external one which is better. plus thos blu ray drive break easy

Honestly, the PS3 is still in it’s infancy stages but they’ve got a lot of catching up to do. Regardless of the 360 being out for a year longer, the PS3 has no real advantages. It’s seems Sony wasted their time trying to get their shit together with Blu-Ray. Some gamers comment on free online play with the PS3; yes it’s free but it’s sucks in comparison to Xbox Live. I’ll gladly pay $4 per month to have superior online gaming. While playing my brother-in-law’s PS3, I liked RFOM but I wasn’t blown away. I’ll consider a PS3 purchase after a price drop and some decent games. Until then, I very happy with my 360 but can’t wait for VF5.

The PS3 is a good piece of kit. Sony has the right idea in that it is trying to make this console last 10 years. Whether it will actually last that long without breaking down?? If you want to save money in the long run then the ps3 has to be the console of choice! MS will have to upgrade or replace the 360 because the size of the games in this new generation will not fit on a DVD. The first such title is nearly here - LAIR. As for the HD stuff, eventually we will all be doing everything in HD, especially as the prices of the tv’s are falling so fast! Right backoff to play with mine, someof us just couldn’t wait

The system just launched, what the fuck do they expect? They act like the 360 and Wii launched with billions of amazing games. In fact the Wii has just as few good games as the Ps3.

……xbox is better.

That’s a shame… after just 8 or so months, PS3 has already equalled the 360. If you stand up and tell me that you think that the 360 is worth the money but not the Ps3… you’re on crack! above all else (whether you are a sony, MS, or nintendo fan) you get a blue-ray player for half the price of a regular one. but now your blue-ray player can play games… and now these games have a long way to go before they even push the envolope of what the PS3 can handle. Currently it’s just as nice (graphics wise) as the 360.

“But no, the PS3 is too expensive!!!” if that’s you, shut up and listen. Of all the people I know that have the 360 I’d say 80% of them have had to send them back. it’s amazing too because the warranty is 1 year, now extended because of this issue, and the 360 dies like 1-3 months after.

Now asside from the whole gaming and the fact that it’s a deal and a half for the blue-ray player… you can surf the internet, install other OS’s on there, message friends, and just plain have a time and a half still without having to buy the rediculously priced games. ya they are expensive, but they’re on blue-ray discs which haven’t been around long enough to come down in price.

now people are going to say “Ps3 is still too expensive, the games suck, the graphics aren’t better than the 360… blah blah blah… I’m an idiot” but the fact remains… the PS2 came out like 5ish years ago and yet it’s still out selling the 360. anything that Sony touches is gold. As I remember sony has owned the market since the PS one because of the quality and graphics.

“But why’d it take so long?” Buy an 360 and a PS3, wait a year and a half and find out which system you have to send back… and since the 360 has been out that long, we already know that that is a problem for them.
And with the history of Sony… the PS3 isn’t going to choke on the discs and die like the 360!
PS3 is going to stay in the market for the next 10 years easy…

But I guess that’s just reality…. rather my opinnion

Cheers

SO many faults in that argument.

Going by Sony’s track record the PS3 ain’t going to choke on discs? Tell that to the huge number of people that had the common disk read error on the PS2 just after warrenty expires.

PS3 is worth the money? Well according to your points only if it matters to you that your games console does a lot of shit a games console doesn’t need to do.

80% sent back? Still got mine going strong from release in Europe (by the way that has now outlasted the two PS2’s that I had, combined).

You see what happens when I go to work and decide to actually work.. I miss great threads like this. But late is better then never so it’s time to add my own two cents.

AOL was wrong in naming PS3 number two… It should have been 1. lol Just fun in games. It’s not that bad of a system… It just so happens it’s not that great of one either. I’m not going into detail but let’s just say in my opinion, blu-ray is well.. Something they could have skipped on. It’s not HDTV is not yet main stream.. Close but no cigar. I know 5 PS3 owners. Only one with a hdtv. Do you think they are shoving out to buy blu ray movies. They are still watching boot legged movies… Sooo blue ray more or less is a forced purchase.

Oh and real quick… Sony stated they built their system with the intention of it lasting ten years… Ten is a big number… Now is it just me or… The average life span of a system is like what.. 6 years max… So when the Super Nintendo WII 2.0 and the X-box 720 comes out with their new age tech PS3 will still be around with it’s.. not so new tech.. Ten years. Let’s hope they make 4 years.
Ciao!