PS3 is the only console that's really next-gen. The 360 already is pretty much current-gen (to the fanboys: this does not equal bad) and the Wii fills a category of its own.
PS3 is the only console that's really next-gen. The 360 already is pretty much current-gen (to the fanboys: this does not equal bad) and the Wii fills a category of its own.
How so Don Andy? The PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 are practically equal in hardware capability (in some ways the 360 exceeds the PS3, and vice versa). So I'm not sure what you mean by your comment. Unless of course you're talking about the next-gen format it runs. Which is so next-gen that I personally believe they shouldn't have put it in a console until the next next-gen era (IE the PS4, to clarify). Although I do agree the Wii is in a category of its own.
The Blu-Ray Format is the reason the PS3 is doing as good as it is. Anybody who says the PS3 is doing bad is crazy since the PS2 had the same start. And the PS1 after 1 year was 4 mil behind in sales compared to the PS3
The Blu-Ray Format is the reason the PS3 is doing as good as it is. Anybody who says the PS3 is doing bad is crazy since the PS2 had the same start. And the PS1 after 1 year was 4 mil behind in sales compared to the PS3
That wasn't what I was saying. Although the Blu-ray functionality is what jacks up the price. But no, what I was saying is that I believe that blu-ray is too early. We as gamers don't need it yet. And the PS3 is notorious for loading games slower because the blu-ray functionality hasn't been perfected yet. On the next consoles I think it would make perfect sense to use the HD-DVD or Blu-ray format (one or the other), but right now DVD, in my eyes, is good enough. Because DVD, loading, playback, functionality, it's all been perfected. I don't mind playing games on 2 DVD discs instead of 1 Blu-ray disc. Anywho, my point wasn't that Blu-ray was bad, or anything like that, my point was that I personally feel it came too soon.
The Blu-Ray Format is the reason the PS3 is doing as good as it is. Anybody who says the PS3 is doing bad is crazy since the PS2 had the same start. And the PS1 after 1 year was 4 mil behind in sales compared to the PS3
That wasn't what I was saying. Although the Blu-ray functionality is what jacks up the price. But no, what I was saying is that I believe that blu-ray is too early. We as gamers don't need it yet. And the PS3 is notorious for loading games slower because the blu-ray functionality hasn't been perfected yet. On the next consoles I think it would make perfect sense to use the HD-DVD or Blu-ray format (one or the other), but right now DVD, in my eyes, is good enough. Because DVD, loading, playback, functionality, it's all been perfected. I don't mind playing games on 2 DVD discs instead of 1 Blu-ray disc. Anywho, my point wasn't that Blu-ray was bad, or anything like that, my point was that I personally feel it came too soon.
Sorry you feel that way because with blu-ray the developers don't have to worry about compressing since it's pretty much guaranteed to fit there. Not to mention The PS3 caches onto the hdd for the load times so that's not a problem. DVD is gonna be an out dated format anyway. With blu-ray sony is future proofing. In 2010 for example when games are even bigger than now I'm positive the PS3 will gain a lot of exclusives since they will not be able to make the game fit onto a DVD9 for the 360 or DVD5 for the Wii.