PDA

View Full Version : Top 10 Reasons why PS3 will win by Insomniac


PerpetualHeaven
03-27-2007, 08:42 PM
Top 10 Insomniac (http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News-32115.aspx)

Interesting article I'm not saying he's right but shuns some light on a few things.

WildManWiles01
03-27-2007, 08:55 PM
Although he does make some good points, I am biased towards the ol' box and will never buy a ps3 unless it lowers to $150 or less. And by that time there will be an even better Xbox, which would have already been bought by me.

Walcherina
03-27-2007, 09:26 PM
Untill I actually see the things he's talking about happen, I will never think the PS3 is better than the 360. We'll see what actually comes out of it.

Sasuke-Xiin
03-27-2007, 09:58 PM
he forgot how everyone is jumping the sony ship and how it may not be around long enough to win.

highpass
03-28-2007, 09:13 AM
2. Swings and roundabouts at the moment. Until the PS3 service matches that of the 360 i'm quite happy to pay the whopping £4 a month.

3. Uber FUD. Blu ray for games is argued to death. Until i see a game that requires 50gb - the majority of which is not FMV - i'm quite happy with DVD9, or even multiple disks. Changing a disk every 10 hours does not make jesus cry.

4. Casino Royale. Casino Royale?! A movie. If that's your number 4 as to why a games machine will win, you've got problems.

5 & 6. Fair shout in terms of features, although again isn't a deciding factor as to why the games will be better.

7, 9 & 10. What.

8. True, apart from the GPUs of both units being roughly equivalent. Anyone can compare the specs of both units and it becomes obvious the RSX is dated compared to the features of the Xenos. WTF is this guy on? No doubt the Cell has the upper hand in potential® though.

So in conclusion: Out of all that fuddy crap, there were one or two points covering games. Not that games are important in console terms eh!
Sony ought put muzzles on anyone associated with them in hopes of controlling the utter shite that spews from within.

Minty
03-28-2007, 09:31 AM
The only major difference between the two: Blu Ray.

Will people buy a console so they can then by a load of Blu-Ray movies, or will they stick with a console that will play their current DVD colection. Thats the debate at the moment.

PerpetualHeaven
03-28-2007, 12:41 PM
Meh, I agree with the 50GB blu-ray space. I mean look at PC games coming out as of late. You can only compress so much and when you compress, you have room for so much. I mean as he said, Resistance took up 14GB. There are a few games on PC that take up more then DVD9. Actually a lot of PC games are multi-disc. And there have been a lot of PS3 games that go more then 10GBs. Besides, why in the hell would I advocate multi-disc? Isn't this next-gen? Screw multi-disc. The last multi-disc game I owned was for PS1 and that was FF9. I thought we progressed and not backwards. When I honestly hear people say that it's okay for mutli-disc I think, "You have issues." In no way should we have to be using multi-disk EVER. The fact that my last console owned multi-disc game was PS1 is pathetic. Just read this. PS1 man. That's horrid. One of the reasons I just bought games for my PS2 instead of Gamecube. You know how annoying it was to play Tiger Woods multi-disk on gamecube? Oh I finished 9 holes, switch disk. Next-gen not last-gen. Multi-disc is a thing of the past. I can't believe you would advocate something as stupid as that. You complain about many other things, yet you support multi-disc? Incredible. These forum boards amaze me everyday. I don't care if you all are fanboys or that this is a 360 board, this is just brand new to me.

And his point of the movie was that there are people who use blu-ray and that it isn't just some new drive that nobody uses at all. That's his point.

Also, I can agree with his online debate. You pay 4 pounds a month? in 4 years you've paid 198 pounds. For what? PSN offers dedicated servers the same as XBL. That's why you pay. You don't pay for XBL marketplace you pay for the dedicated servers. And what XBL offers compared to PSN, isn't a massive difference for an online that's been out for 5 months so far. When I think long run, I could invest that 274.55 dollars somewhere else in 4 years (the canadian price ends up being around there; also equivalent of 3 new games for me). I have no problem paying for XBL, but when I hear PSN has dedicated servers also that offer almost no lag, screw that. I'm not paying for marketplace that should be free.. I'm paying for quality online. So what's the point of comparing all the stuff XBL offers when you get all of that for free? But then you pay money just to play against each other. So you can't say XBL gold is that much better then PSN when all you're paying for is the dedicated servers not the actual marketplace?

What crunches my balls about all of this is that you all support the same crap Microsoft has done yet if Sony has done the same thing and you bust their balls for it and then you turn around and make yourselves believe that the PS3 doesn't offer anything good. I find it surprising how far some people will go to screw themselves out of a gaming experience just to make a stupid stand. If you're going to make a stand against sony might aswell against Microsoft. But I personally will not screw myself out of the ultimate gaming experience. Yes, it's expensive but that's the price of entertainment. I've paid more for watching movies in a theatre then I ever will for a PS3. I'm not going to magically go lop-sided just so I can screw myself out of gaming.

highpass
03-28-2007, 01:37 PM
Please don't affiliate me with fanboys. I'm quite unbias about consoles, i just have hangups with awful PR FUD such as this. That's not to say MS are saints, they're just the lesser evil of the two in this respect.

You do realise that some data on certain Blu Ray games is duplicated and placed at different areas to help with seek times, right? Thus that 14gb might not be so honest (although i'm sure it's nothing like 9gb), especially when you take into account the audio is uncompressed; you couldn't tell the difference between that and properly encoded, compressed audio playing over Opticals on honest studio monitors. Resistance could definitely fit on a DVD9 if done correctly, and would look the same as the BR version (minus any fancy 1080p FMVs it may contain).
Even forgetting that fact for a minute, if it wasn't for BR the PS3 would've been out a year ago, and would've been cheaper.

Mass Effect, GOW, Oblivion, etc are all DVD9; the first of which is absolutely huge in comparison to Resistance. Blue Dragon however is multi disk, but why is that? FMV. My point is that whilst resource requirements expand generation to generation, technology advances too as i'm sure you know. Things like ProFX's texture tech radically reduces space required, down to just kbs. Then you get to FMV... and BR will be the winner time and time again in that respect.

With all that said and done, i'm actually not opposed to the idea of scrapping multi disk sets, just not for £146. My gripe is with the way he explains it - not to mention his theory about 7 levels being complete toff.
Do note that whilst all i've said above appears to be arguing, they're merely ways of getting around space problems. Space problems BR doesn't have, obviously, i'm just trying to make it clear that BR is not essential for a decent gaming experience - and that's all i'm bothered about.

About the movie thing.. yeah fair shout. But it's hardly a reason for it to win in terms of gaming is it Perp? I'm sure it'll be the #1 BR player for years to come, but that doesn't make it appeal to me, personally, when i think about games. Entertainment, sure, but not games.

PSN offers dedicated servers? Since when? I thought it was all P2P - same as the 360. If it's all dedicated, i stand very corrected; I can't remember the last 360 game, if any, i played that had dedicated servers. It all relies on you. That, my friend is the one thing i've stood firm about - we pay for Gold, we should get dedicated servers.

At the end of the day in terms of XBL, i'm paying for the communications service. That, i'm told, PSN has yet to match, but i'm certain it will in the future. Like you i don't mind paying my £4 a month but am disconcerted that PSN offers (or will eventually) the same for free. I wouldn't switch consoles over it, but i'd be proper pissed.

Again, Perp, check older things i've previously said if you like, i'm not of the "Sony just can't do nothing good y'all" persuasion you speak about.

SteelerXBox360
03-28-2007, 03:49 PM
First off, I will admit that I am biased towards the 360, if that makes me a fanboy, then so be it, but since I am not a boy, call me a fanman :)

Second, this is in no way a flame on you Perpetual, you didn't write this article, you just found it for us :)

Being a electronics consumer that owns many Sony products, I am not anti-Sony by any means but I will say that I am not rooting for them in this regard, although, I do like the competition, which will only make the 360 an even better experience...

A decent article but you can tell that this guy is leaning towards the PS3, no doubt.

"virtually lag-free dedicated servers at no cost" - I would like to see how lag-free these servers would be with the volume that Live has, it is easy to be lag-free when no one is using them. Also, mark my words, the cost will come to the consumers in another area or down the line here...this is their inroad to sell against Live and it doesn't appear to be working...why? And it is easy to say dedicated servers but is this really the case or do they just have like 1%, so they can say make that claim...

"Resistance didn’t support texture streaming" - Funny how Gears looks better admittedly, they have more space but aren't using it, so what's the point? Their big competition to 360's Gears has all the resources but is using them for uncompressed sound and HD mpegs, everyone's audio systems have decoders for sound, so this is a waste and I am glad that they have nice cut scenes...

If you read it right, the 3:1 sales ratio of Blu-ray to HD-DVD is taken mostly from Amazon, a big site but not representative of all sales.

"Sony’s choice to ship with composite cables" - now this really sums it all up for me...so you have the end-all HD console, etc. and you ship with SD cables, WTF??? I bet those Blu-ray discs look good with those. But they have HDMI inputs, which are a step in the right direction but they pass the cost of HD cables onto the consumer, so see here is where your $ is going from the free server access...I didn't even know this until I read this article...

The one place that I really think that Sony got it right was with the HD (Hard Drive), so see I am not all against it and like I said, competition is good as this will intern lead to Microsoft giving us more HD space in the future, which is already in the works...

He even takes on the Wii, so you know he is reaching but he does have a point about the HD (hi-def) difference, which is also a sticking pt. for me too but to suggest that they will surpass them in sales at this pt. is nuts...

So, he starts with the title, "PS3 Has a Major CPU Advantage" and ends with "but within two years you will see games that surpass what is possible on the Xbox 360"...so it will take them (3) years to surpass the 360 as it came out a year later...being a software developer myself, not games unfortunately :(, I see that they might have made the PS3 more powerful but it seems like it is more difficult to code against and use. They are also playing catch-up with creating libraries, etc. They will lose this war- guaranteed as Microsoft is a development house and light years ahead of them in this regard, trust me...

Also, if you look at the tab order on this website, the PS3 tab is 1st on this site which says a lot right there...

There are some good titles on the PS3 to come for sure but I do not know if it is enough to convince me to go out and buy one, plus my 360 might get jealous :p

My point in posting is just to point out some of the flaws in the article but it is still a good article. I am also calling a spade a spade and see this guy as a fanman too just not the same one that I am ;)

PerpetualHeaven
03-28-2007, 08:39 PM
"virtually lag-free dedicated servers at no cost" - I would like to see how lag-free these servers would be with the volume that Live has, it is easy to be lag-free when no one is using them. Also, mark my words, the cost will come to the consumers in another area or down the line here...this is their inroad to sell against Live and it doesn't appear to be working...why? And it is easy to say dedicated servers but is this really the case or do they just have like 1%, so they can say make that claim...



Have you ever played resistance online? There are a lot of people who play that online. I've played an 8 v 8 match without any lag at all.


If you read it right, the 3:1 sales ratio of Blu-ray to HD-DVD is taken mostly from Amazon, a big site but not representative of all sales.


If you look at the number of titles out for blu-ray compared to HD-DVD it's almost a complete blow out. Blu-ray is winning the battle.


"Sony’s choice to ship with composite cables" - now this really sums it all up for me...so you have the end-all HD console, etc. and you ship with SD cables, WTF??? I bet those Blu-ray discs look good with those. But they have HDMI inputs, which are a step in the right direction but they pass the cost of HD cables onto the consumer, so see here is where your $ is going from the free server access...I didn't even know this until I read this article...


Well, XBOX decides to release a new console with HDMI finally and up the price 80 bucks. What's the point? You can get cables for HDMI for like 15 bucks. What's the point of dishing out for monster cables when the quality on the screen won't make a difference? Don't think you'll be complaining when you just spent 500-600 bucks on a PS3.


So, he starts with the title, "PS3 Has a Major CPU Advantage" and ends with "but within two years you will see games that surpass what is possible on the Xbox 360"...so it will take them (3) years to surpass the 360 as it came out a year later...being a software developer myself, not games unfortunately :(, I see that they might have made the PS3 more powerful but it seems like it is more difficult to code against and use. They are also playing catch-up with creating libraries, etc. They will lose this war- guaranteed as Microsoft is a development house and light years ahead of them in this regard, trust me...

With Sony releasing PS Edge to make developing a butt load easier, I don't think the catch up will take aslong.


Also, if you look at the tab order on this website, the PS3 tab is 1st on this site which says a lot right there...

There are some good titles on the PS3 to come for sure but I do not know if it is enough to convince me to go out and buy one, plus my 360 might get jealous :p

My point in posting is just to point out some of the flaws in the article but it is still a good article. I am also calling a spade a spade and see this guy as a fanman too just not the same one that I am ;)

He is a fanman. He's a developer at insomniac. Insomniac makes titles exclusively for Sony. They made Jak and Daxter. The article was suppose to bring light to some things. As for Sony exclusives, they have lost some ongoing series but they have acquired brand new IPs. That's where the futures at. Sure XBOX finally gets DMC at the 4th game. Sure they get Ace Combat at the 6th title. But what about the brand new games? Only reason you're seeing more exclusives go Microsofts way is because Microsoft pays the big dollars and Sony really doesn't care because they're constantly acquiring small developers to make games for them. Like what Microsoft did with Mistwalker. they're coming out with Blue Dragon and Lost Odysessy. Both amazing looking games. Sony is just branching off from old titles and acquiring new things. They're spending money elsewhere. Most of it sounds like people have limited knowledge on what the PS3s exclusive titles are.

So yeah they lost DMC4 and Ace Combat 6 but what are they investing moeny instead? New IPs like Lair, Heavenly Sword, White Knight Story, Ni-Oh to name a few. To get the new you may have to sacrifice the old. Either way, I don't care. I'm the winner in the end. I get to play all games on all systems. I just find fanboyism/fanmanism a phenomenon. What could provoke someone to sacrifice gaming to just obey one company? It's not like you get anything out of it.

slowpantz
03-30-2007, 03:02 AM
I am just gald somebody is standing up for Sony. Good Job insomniac I cant wait till the new ratchet and clank. :drunk

Jdm
04-02-2007, 05:07 AM
This gaming war will always be on. No one knows exactly who will be the undisputed champ in this generation, so by saying the PS3 will be the winner is kind of far-fetched. The Xbox 360 has a complete year under its belt. The PS3 and Wii just launched this last November. Wait a year or so, and then we can really get down to the details.

k_dog
04-02-2007, 05:29 AM
Everybody has heard my rant so I wont go on again.

I don't totaly agree with everything, but the lag is mostly true.

I've played a FFA in Resistance with 40 players and there was virtualy NO lag what so ever.

Wizzbang6
04-02-2007, 06:27 AM
I also own all 3 consoles but when it comes down to the crunch i will by my games for the 360 just because of the achievments, this is probably not the best reason but what can i say :)

k_dog
04-02-2007, 07:23 AM
I also own all 3 consoles but when it comes down to the crunch i will by my games for the 360 just because of the achievments, this is probably not the best reason but what can i say :)

Achievements are the #1 reason Sony is developing "Home"

Jdm
04-06-2007, 05:36 AM
Achievements are the #1 reason Sony is developing "Home"

^^^When Home is launched for the PS3, I'll have to debate whether or not I should start buying games for the PS3. Regardless, I will pick up games for my 360 even if the games are available on other consoles. Like Achievements, should I start building on the PS3's Home?