5 or so odd years later , has your opinion changed on ps3?

[kedawa]

It's still a mess as far as I'm concerned. The interface is convoluted and excessive for a game console, the constant updates and brutal load times are infuriating, and the slim consoles are an absolute nightmare to repair.
Maybe if Sony develops a cheaper top-loading version, I'll finally buy one, but as it stands the PS3 is still very unappealing to me.

To their credit, Sony has the best motion control system, but that's a bit like being the smartest kid in special ed.

[Gamevet]

As I already stated it's a known fact that all systems have updates. But I don't play games on my Pc so that point doesn't matter to me. As far as consoles go the PS3 has ridiculously long load times and after 5 years I'm wondering why they haven't improved upon them any. Does anyone know any specific reason? Is it the hardware, the bluray or perhaps a combo of both?

My experience with the PS3 download speeds is that it has a lot to do with your connection. I noticed a download of Pulse was only about 600 kbps while I was using my Wi-Fi connection. I plugged the PS3 into the ethernet port I have in the livingroom, and I was getting about 1.2 Mbps. The 70 Meg show downloaded in 2 minutes.

The one thing I've noticed about the 360, is that you can usually tell when a major update is about to happen. I've noticed that minor updates happen more frequently, as has been the case before this last major change, and then MS drops the rest on the final update and upgrade. They do the same thing when they're about to release the next service pack for Windows. Sony, on the other hand, appears to just do these updates in one big package. I find that the more time spent away from either console, the longer the update takes. Judging by the amount of missing space on my PS3's 250 gig HDD, those updates must take up quite a bit more space than those on the 360.

Honestly, I find the bitching about the amount of time it takes for a PS3 update, to be rather silly. Yeah, it's inconvenient, but it's no worse than what you have to go through with a PC and in most cases it's actually a lot better. As far as game loading times go, Fallout: New Vegas on my 360, takes just about as long as Skyrim does on my PS3.

[icbrkr]

Don't know about your PC, but both my Windows boxes and OS X boxes download patches in the background and then either install them when I tell them to, or maybe upon next reboot. I'm still able to do things while they download in the background.

Personally, I wasn't bitching, just stating a fact. I don't know how well the PS3 is since I don't have a heck of a lot of time anymore to play games and each time I've tried its downloaded a patch that prevented me from doing anything while that happened. Unfortunately, this happened at multiple friend's houses - they go to show me something, fire up the PS3, a patch has to happen and we all go do something else. Again, not bitching, just an observation.

[Gamevet]

Don't know about your PC, but both my Windows boxes and OS X boxes download patches in the background and then either install them when I tell them to, or maybe upon next reboot. I'm still able to do things while they download in the background.

Yeah, but but depending on how busy my HDD is, I usually won't play a game while that is happening, because it can cause a little bit of lag. You really can't do anything on your 360 while it's doing a system update either. But, at least it isn't as inconvenient.



Personally, I wasn't bitching, just stating a fact. I don't know how well the PS3 is since I don't have a heck of a lot of time anymore to play games and each time I've tried its downloaded a patch that prevented me from doing anything while that happened. Unfortunately, this happened at multiple friend's houses - they go to show me something, fire up the PS3, a patch has to happen and we all go do something else. Again, not bitching, just an observation.

I had a C-64 that I played quite a bit. You'd have to wait 10 minutes for some games to download, but it didn't stop us from playing it.

I wanted to do a Metro 2033 benchmark to test out an over-clock of my GTX 460's in SLI. I ended up waiting 10 minutes for a major patch to download. Updates are just a part of gaming now-a-days. Just because someone doesn't have the patience for it, doesn't necessarily mean its a deal breaker. I know I've probably spent more time going to get a game and doing stuff around the house, before I ever got to play them.

[Bojay1997]

Yeah, but but depending on how busy my HDD is, I usually won't play a game while that is happening, because it can cause a little bit of lag. You really can't do anything on your 360 while it's doing a system update either. But, at least it isn't as inconvenient.



I had a C-64 that I played quite a bit. You'd have to wait 10 minutes for some games to download, but it didn't stop us from playing it.

I wanted to do a Metro 2033 benchmark to test out an over-clock of my GTX 460's in SLI. I ended up waiting 10 minutes for a major patch to download. Updates are just a part of gaming now-a-days. Just because someone doesn't have the patience for it, doesn't necessarily mean its a deal breaker. I know I've probably spent more time going to get a game and doing stuff around the house, before I ever got to play them.

I do have to say that of the three current generation consoles, the PS3 seems to take the longest to download updates and they do seem to happen awfully frequently. Part of it I'm sure has to do with their recent experience being hacked, so they are probably pretty anxious to avoid that in the future by pushing out updates regularly. The wireless on the PS3 is also notoriously slow, certainly slower than both my 360 and Wii. It could be that it was free from the start, so they used lower end/slower components, but updates can take literally an hour for me sometimes which does prevent me from playing at all. I'm sure wired is faster, but my PS3 is in the family room hooked up to my TV, so there is no practical way to wire it to the router which is in another room.

I would also point out that there were plenty of fast loading devices available for the Commodore 64 and with very few exceptions, I never waited more than a few minutes to play a game. Sure, for those odd games that for security reasons locked out fast loaders, there were long waits, but crackers usually took care of that in short order.

None of this is a deal breaker and it really is just part of modern gaming, but I do agree that the PS3 seems to be the worst of the three IMHO.

[Gamevet]

I do have to say that of the three current generation consoles, the PS3 seems to take the longest to download updates and they do seem to happen awfully frequently. Part of it I'm sure has to do with their recent experience being hacked, so they are probably pretty anxious to avoid that in the future by pushing out updates regularly. The wireless on the PS3 is also notoriously slow, certainly slower than both my 360 and Wii. It could be that it was free from the start, so they used lower end/slower components, but updates can take literally an hour for me sometimes which does prevent me from playing at all. I'm sure wired is faster, but my PS3 is in the family room hooked up to my TV, so there is no practical way to wire it to the router which is in another room.


I ran a network cable into the livingroom. I couldn't get my 360 online without it.

I'm now using the Wi-Fi adapter on both of my 360s, because a lightning storm took out my old router and the network ports on both of my 360s as well. I had decided to use the PS3 Wi-Fi, because I didn't want it to get fried should another router blow. I'm sticking to the wired connection now, after discovering that the PS3's Wi-Fi connection wasn't fast enough.

[kupomogli]

As far as consoles go the PS3 has ridiculously long load times and after 5 years I'm wondering why they haven't improved upon them any. Does anyone know any specific reason? Is it the hardware, the bluray or perhaps a combo of both?

Coming from someone who rarely plays the console. The only load time analysis you'd be able to compare are those with the Uncharted series or the multiconsole analysis you pulled out of your ass.

What you're going off of is the fact that DVD reads faster than Bluray. Despite that the Uncharted games have no install and almost no loading. There are a lot of games that load fast on the PS3, Sony exclusive or otherwise. There are also games that have terrible load times, Little Big Planet and Gran Turismo 5 for example, both Sony exclusives.

Between both PS3 and 360, the load times are pretty much the same, sometimes better on one console, sometimes better on the other.

[Gameguy]

What are you talking about, consoles don't use a keyboard and mouse! ;)
Actually they do, and it makes me sad.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/video-games/controller-freak/keyboard-and-mouse-gaming-on-your-playstation-3/article1741512/


I get that PC games sometimes need to be patched because of surprise problems with hardware conflicts, it's not like the developers can test the game out on every possible type of hardware combination so this I can sort of forgive. This isn't really the case with console games, you have a standard console with standard parts and you know ahead of time the exact hardware you'll be programming for(even various revisions of consoles should be known ahead of time). There really shouldn't need to be constant updates to fix stuff that should have been done before the game gets released.

It just bugs me so I avoid modern games that aren't on handheld systems or the PC. With consoles I don't want to worry about hardware problems or updates or installing games or online stuff. I just want to start it up and start playing, I don't need to update Sega CD or PS1 games or firmware and that's how consoles should be. If I have to mess around with tons of stuff why don't I just use a PC instead? At least with a PC you have more freedom so you can repair and replace parts yourself or use whatever operating system or programs you want.

[The 1 2 P]

Coming from someone who rarely plays the console. The only load time analysis you'd be able to compare are those with the Uncharted series or the multiconsole analysis you pulled out of your ass.

What you're going off of is the fact that DVD reads faster than Bluray. Despite that the Uncharted games have no install and almost no loading. There are a lot of games that load fast on the PS3, Sony exclusive or otherwise. There are also games that have terrible load times, Little Big Planet and Gran Turismo 5 for example, both Sony exclusives.

Between both PS3 and 360, the load times are pretty much the same, sometimes better on one console, sometimes better on the other.

My experience is obviously based on my use of all three systems download and install times. As Bojay just pointed out two post above yours, I am not the only person who's noticed the PS3 update times are annoyingly long compared to the other consoles.

As for your "rarely plays the console" comment, I also rarely play my Wii. But the last time I did for the two games earlier mentioned, both of those updates took less than 5 minutes a piece. Thats something I haven't been able to say for any PS3 updates and that includes first party games MAG and Resistance.

Edit: And just so you are clear Kupo, I'm not really talking about "loading screens time" between menus or levels(even though I used the "loading" wording earlier). I'm talking about update times and then the additional time it takes to install them.

[kedawa]

Honestly, I find the bitching about the amount of time it takes for a PS3 update, to be rather silly. Yeah, it's inconvenient, but it's no worse than what you have to go through with a PC and in most cases it's actually a lot better.
Ths is just crazy talk.
My PC has never once forced me to update before I could go online. Some games may have their own mandatory updates, but most don't.
Game systems shouldn't waste my time with system updates, they should waste my time with video games.

[JSoup]

Not sure if you play games online, and if you don't then it doesn't matter, but if you do, the $150 you saved by purchasing the 360 would have been used on Xbox Live Gold.

I thought about that at the time too, but decided that it would be a better idea to get a slightly used PS3 at far below the cost for any current system new and then play online for free.

Edit: All that and the PS3 had more games that interested me with a less frustrating controller than the 360.

[Gamevet]

Ths is just crazy talk.
My PC has never once forced me to update before I could go online. Some games may have their own mandatory updates, but most don't.
Game systems shouldn't waste my time with system updates, they should waste my time with video games.

Really?

Have you ever had a title update through Steam? It's especially great when you're installing the game for the first time.

I'll put it this way. I have one PC I use for normal everyday use and I have another that I use for nothing but gaming. When I turn it on, I'm playing a game or messing around with the hardware setups. So, much like the PS3, when that PC is turned on, it's usually for gaming.

[duffmanth]

Yeah one that Nintendo's been laughing about all the way to the bank

Not lately.

[Gamevet]

The Wii is last-gen hardware with a gimmick control scheme. It isn't anywhere near the 360 or PS3. It was basically a reboot of the Gamecube.

[duffmanth]

I don't know, I bought a PS3 at launch and recently bought a slim to replace it (I also bought the Wii and 360 at launch and have a slim 360 as well), so I don't suppose my opinion has changed much. I do have to say that my opinion of what console would have the best games this holiday season following the announcements at E3 has changed. I was pretty sure Sony would dominate this year, but I really found very little compelling on the PS3, the 360 or Wii unfortunately. I guess I am most looking forward to the Vita and whatever comes next from the big three console wise as everything for 2012 seems like sequels.

I feel the same way about PS3 this year. It had some great releases like Uncharted 3, Resistance 3, Killzone 3, and Infamous 2, but Sony didn't promote these games enough, with the exception being Uncharted 3. The rest of these games got lost in a sea of FPS this year and never really garnered much attention. Next year is looking good though, Twisted Metal, SSX, MGS: Rising, maybe The Last Guardian?

[j_factor]

If the updates are such an inconvenience, why don't you just not download them? You're not required to download every system update; in fact, there's no requirement that your PS3 be connected to the internet at all.

[Griking]

Think I'll skip the PS3 and wait until the PS4, unless they go real cheap, like Wii prices, $149.99.

I actually think the PS3 has become worse, no Linux option, no PS2 support, and not too many exclusives that I'm dying for. Maybe I'll pick up Little Big Planet 1 and 2, and 3D Dot Game Heroes.

I agree. It seems like every year or so they strip away another feature that used to be a PS3 selling point back when it launched. Other than that I think that it would be hard to imagine Sony ever being able to surpass Xbox Live within this generation.

[kedawa]

If the updates are such an inconvenience, why don't you just not download them? You're not required to download every system update; in fact, there's no requirement that your PS3 be connected to the internet at all.
This is true, but for a significant part of the system's library, online play is the main draw.

[BlastProcessing402]

Had my PS3 for about a year. Actually will be a year on sunday :)

Really glad I got it, the inFamous games were a blast, and without a PS3 I'd never have been able to play them.

I know there are cheaper BluRay players out there now, but it's the only one I've had, so even though I mainly got it for PS3 exclusive games (multiplatform I still tend to go 360), I like being able to play those too now.

It's also pretty good as a media center for streaming stuff from my PC's to the TV, but it's a little disappointing that it doesn't play as many files as my 10 year old Xbox running XBMC will.

[NayusDante]

I picked up my 60gb PS3 in the summer of 2007. This was when they marked them down to $500 before the 80gb model was introduced. I had camped the Wii launch the previous November, and was still in my anti-Microsoft teenage rebellion phase. The day I bought it I also picked up Resistance, Sonic 06, and Enchanted Arms. None of which I thought were very good.

The first game I actually enjoyed on the PS3 was Gundam Crossfire, which I picked up a few months later. After that, the Armored Core games.

I don't think I really got very much out of the PS3 until about 2010. MGS4 and FFXIII were the big releases that originally sold me on the console, but now, I don't think they were really worth the wait.

This summer, that unit's BD laser died. Now it lives on in my bedroom as a PS2 and Netflix box. I have a slim now, but only because I still want to play current console games and there's nothing interesting to me on 360.

The PS3 is the console that I want to love, but I feel like I'm still waiting for games that really grab my attention. The Last Guardian looks interesting, and I'm still catching up on some RPGs, so I'm still hopeful.

Wii is dead until Xenoblade, or until I can get the time for Zelda. My 360 is used more for XNA debugging than games. I can't bring myself to buy a cross-platform game on 360, the fan is too loud compared to the silent PS3.

[Az]

So the wifey-to-be saves up all year and buys me the 320g PS3 bundle that comes with the Move controller. She's a single parent that's been unemployed for 3 years, living on student loans and financial aid until she completed her degree in May and began working right after. Needless to say she was so proud of herself to be able to purchase such an extravagant gift after not having a pot to piss in since she decided to go back to school.

Hooked the system up tonight and it was fucking dead out of the box.

My opinion of the PS "brand" and Sony products in general has went just slightly down.

[Gamevet]

So the wifey-to-be saves up all year and buys me the 320g PS3 bundle that comes with the Move controller. She's a single parent that's been unemployed for 3 years, living on student loans and financial aid until she completed her degree in May and began working right after. Needless to say she was so proud of herself to be able to purchase such an extravagant gift after not having a pot to piss in since she decided to go back to school.

Hooked the system up tonight and it was fucking dead out of the box.

My opinion of the PS "brand" and Sony products in general has went just slightly down.

Did she get a ghetto deal or what? LOL

[Leo_A]

It's still a mess as far as I'm concerned. The interface is convoluted and excessive for a game console, the constant updates and brutal load times are infuriating, and the slim consoles are an absolute nightmare to repair.

I always thought it was the games that mattered the most. Never thought of things such as ease of repair as factoring into my opinion of a system.

[kupomogli]

Hooked the system up tonight and it was fucking dead out of the box.

My opinion of the PS "brand" and Sony products in general has went just slightly down.

Return the system for another one then? That's what I did with my SNES.

My first SNES had a problem right out of the box. It wasn't the SNES itself but the controllerl. Hooked everything up and turned it on, the controller acted as if the left button was constantly being pressed down.

[BlastProcessing402]

Return the system for another one then? That's what I did with my SNES.

My first SNES had a problem right out of the box. It wasn't the SNES itself but the controllerl. Hooked everything up and turned it on, the controller acted as if the left button was constantly being pressed down.

My first Saturn died after a couple of hours. Tried to take it back, but the EB I bought it from was out of stock (this was the tail end of the early launch) and wouldn't give me my cash back so I could walk two doors down and buy one at Babbages. Had to have my mom drive across town after work and exchange it at another EB, then that one had clearly been used, as it had some save games already on it. So back that one went as well. Third one was the charm, though, still have that one, still worked last time I hooked it up months ago.

[WCP]

The only thing that disappoints me about the PS3, is that none of their big exclusive games ever make it onto the PC. The architecture of the PS3 just must be a bit too foreign to make PC ports worthwhile. I can only imagine how amazing it would be to play games like Uncharted 2 and Infamous in full 1080p with all the visual effects maxed out.

I'm sure it would be absolutely glorious. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen. PS3 exclusives are pretty much locked to the PS3.

Still, the PS3 has a very nice flavor to it. Sony has some of the best developers in the world in their private stable, and there are always 3 or 4 big time PS3 exclusives to look forward to each year. I don't really play mutliplatform games on PS3, only the exclusives and the PSN games.

[The 1 2 P]

The only thing that disappoints me about the PS3, is that none of their big exclusive games ever make it onto the PC.


I'm sure it would be absolutely glorious. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen. PS3 exclusives are pretty much locked to the PS3.

But why is that disappointing you about the actual system? Isn't it enough to enjoy the games the way they were originally intended to be played?

[Gamevet]

The only thing that disappoints me about the PS3, is that none of their big exclusive games ever make it onto the PC. The architecture of the PS3 just must be a bit too foreign to make PC ports worthwhile. I can only imagine how amazing it would be to play games like Uncharted 2 and Infamous in full 1080p with all the visual effects maxed out.

I'm sure it would be absolutely glorious. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen. PS3 exclusives are pretty much locked to the PS3.

Still, the PS3 has a very nice flavor to it. Sony has some of the best developers in the world in their private stable, and there are always 3 or 4 big time PS3 exclusives to look forward to each year. I don't really play mutliplatform games on PS3, only the exclusives and the PSN games.

I can't think of any Sony 1st party title that was ported over to the PC. Yeah, second and 3rd party stuff made it.

Honestly, the PC market isn't what it used to be. Everyone plays MMOs, and very few of the big titles sell as well as the console versions. Even the one title that was going to be a showcase for the PC (Battlefield 3) ended up being a broken mess, and I don't know if they've ever fixed those issues.

[Az]

So I go through the trouble of returning my PS3 that was dead out of the box and proceed to hook it up. Then I get the cherry on the icing.

Blu-ray playback is limited to 480i unless you use HDMI cables.

No, I don't mean you're limited to 1080i and under if you use component cables. I mean if you use component cables you'll only get 480i MAXIMUM on BD's. My fancy new 320g PS3 doesn't play PS2 games, nor can I use it as a blu-ray player since I don't have HDMI inputs. Most of the time it's the early adopters that get fucked, I guess in my case it's the late bloomers.

[duffmanth]

I agree. It seems like every year or so they strip away another feature that used to be a PS3 selling point back when it launched. Other than that I think that it would be hard to imagine Sony ever being able to surpass Xbox Live within this generation.

I was puzzled when they started stripping away more and more features from the PS3. I can understand taking away something like backwards compatibility to cut the cost down, but they could've left one stinking memory card slot in the slim PS3.

[duffmanth]

I thought about that at the time too, but decided that it would be a better idea to get a slightly used PS3 at far below the cost for any current system new and then play online for free.

Edit: All that and the PS3 had more games that interested me with a less frustrating controller than the 360.

The one thing I hate about all Playstation consoles are the cheap feeling controllers, to its credit, the 360 controller feels much more solid.

[Gamevet]

I was puzzled when they started stripping away more and more features from the PS3. I can understand taking away something like backwards compatibility to cut the cost down, but they could've left one stinking memory card slot in the slim PS3.

None of the PS3s have a memory slot. It's all done through the USB ports. I bought a memory card adaptor and moved all of my memory card data over to my 60gig PS3 when I'd bought it.

[kupomogli]

He means memory card such as Memory Stick Pro Duo and SD Card slots.

[Gamevet]

He means memory card such as Memory Stick Pro Duo and SD Card slots.

I've used the SD port once, from a camera, but you can still connect the device through the USB. It acts like a hdd storage device. It's not a big loss.

[Snapple]

The only thing that disappoints me about the PS3, is that none of their big exclusive games ever make it onto the PC. The architecture of the PS3 just must be a bit too foreign to make PC ports worthwhile. I can only imagine how amazing it would be to play games like Uncharted 2 and Infamous in full 1080p with all the visual effects maxed out.

I'm sure it would be absolutely glorious. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen. PS3 exclusives are pretty much locked to the PS3.

Still, the PS3 has a very nice flavor to it. Sony has some of the best developers in the world in their private stable, and there are always 3 or 4 big time PS3 exclusives to look forward to each year. I don't really play mutliplatform games on PS3, only the exclusives and the PSN games.

So, the most disappointing thing about the PS3 is that you have to play it? The system would be better if there were no exclusives? But then it sounds like you wouldn't play the PS3. Maybe it's just me, but this is a strange comment about making the PS3 better.


Anyway, for me, my opinion changed quite a bit since launch and even before launch. I hated the original pricetag, and I looked over at the Wii. I thought, "Nintendo cares about more than just graphics! They're still trying to revolutionize games! Sony doesn't get it!" Well, long story short I almost never play my Wii anymore, and I love my PS3. Opinions can change.

[Kyle15]

So I go through the trouble of returning my PS3 that was dead out of the box and proceed to hook it up. Then I get the cherry on the icing.

Blu-ray playback is limited to 480i unless you use HDMI cables.

No, I don't mean you're limited to 1080i and under if you use component cables. I mean if you use component cables you'll only get 480i MAXIMUM on BD's. My fancy new 320g PS3 doesn't play PS2 games, nor can I use it as a blu-ray player since I don't have HDMI inputs. Most of the time it's the early adopters that get fucked, I guess in my case it's the late bloomers.

Bluray playback is limited to everything but 1080p with component cables on the PS3. You'll get 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i.
The same goes for games.

[Gamevet]

He just needs to change the video output settings for the component cable.

[Az]

Bluray playback is limited to everything but 1080p with component cables on the PS3. You'll get 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i.
The same goes for games.

Sorry, not if you bought one after June 2011. (http://www.1up.com/news/new-ps3-model-requires-hdmi-hd-blu-ray-playback-not-hd-gaming)

Sure, games still support higher resolutions with component cables. I think it's rather crappy that a lot of the PS3 games doesn't support 1080i/1080p, yet some of those same games that are released on 360 support it.

[j_factor]

Sorry, not if you bought one after June 2011. (http://www.1up.com/news/new-ps3-model-requires-hdmi-hd-blu-ray-playback-not-hd-gaming)

Sure, games still support higher resolutions with component cables. I think it's rather crappy that a lot of the PS3 games doesn't support 1080i/1080p, yet some of those same games that are released on 360 support it.

That's because Xbox 360 upscales and PS3 doesn't (not PS3 games anyway). This means that the PS3 games that do support 1080p are actually natively running at that resolution; I don't believe any 360 games do. This has both pro and con: while the lack of upscaling is a drawback, every PS3 game is guaranteed to be at least 720p. Whereas a lot of Xbox 360 games are actually running at a lesser resolution, such as 576p.

[Kyle15]

Sorry, not if you bought one after June 2011. (http://www.1up.com/news/new-ps3-model-requires-hdmi-hd-blu-ray-playback-not-hd-gaming)

Sure, games still support higher resolutions with component cables. I think it's rather crappy that a lot of the PS3 games doesn't support 1080i/1080p, yet some of those same games that are released on 360 support it.

Is that exclusive to the PS3 or something? Blu discs have always been 1080p with HD cables only.

[Az]

This has both pro and con: while the lack of upscaling is a drawback, every PS3 game is guaranteed to be at least 720p. Whereas a lot of Xbox 360 games are actually running at a lesser resolution, such as 576p.

One of the major drawbacks to that is if your TV doesn't support 720p but does 1080i/1080p, you're still forced to look at a 480p picture. In that situation I personally would rather see a 720p game upscaled than be forced to 480p.

[Gamevet]

One of the major drawbacks to that is if your TV doesn't support 720p but does 1080i/1080p, you're still forced to look at a 480p picture. In that situation I personally would rather see a 720p game upscaled than be forced to 480p.

That's a pretty rare case. My 1080p set shows most PS3 games are being displayed at 1280 x 720.

[Cornelius]

Sorry, not if you bought one after June 2011. (http://www.1up.com/news/new-ps3-model-requires-hdmi-hd-blu-ray-playback-not-hd-gaming)

Sure, games still support higher resolutions with component cables. I think it's rather crappy that a lot of the PS3 games doesn't support 1080i/1080p, yet some of those same games that are released on 360 support it.


Is that exclusive to the PS3 or something? Blu discs have always been 1080p with HD cables only.

ALL new Blu-Ray movie playing devices are now required to only do 480p or better on HDMI. If you use analog cables with a new device, movie playback is supposed to be limited to 480i. This is the result of the Blu DRM group stepping up their control. It looks like it was supposed to happen at the very beginning of 2011, so it is a little surprising that it took until June for it to hit the PS3. So in my opinion this isn't really a complaint that should be directed (only) at the PS3, since it applies to all BD players.

[j_factor]

One of the major drawbacks to that is if your TV doesn't support 720p but does 1080i/1080p, you're still forced to look at a 480p picture. In that situation I personally would rather see a 720p game upscaled than be forced to 480p.

If your TV supports 1080p, it supports 720p. Some do support 1080i without 720p, but that's unusual. And even then, lots of non-1080p PS3 games support both 720p and 1080i.

[Cornelius]

Well damn. DAMN DAMN DAMN! My opinion just changed. got the YLOD tonight in the middle of some Dark Souls. And I've been boasting around here about how awesome I am for putting new thermal compound on my system so I don't have to worry about it for the past 6 mo. or so. So much for that! Grumble grumble. Not that I'm swearing off PS3s now, I'm just looking for a good deal on a slim... don't think the repair route is worth it.

I can hardly believe how little a ylod 60 is worth on ebay. :(

[Shulamana]

I sold my backwards compatible PS3 back in September after having it about 3.5 years. In the whole time I owned it, I purchased 3 games, and barely played any of them. I used it far more to play PS1/PS2 games, the occasional Mega Man 9/10, and for Blu-Ray/Netflix than anything else, but it still sat idle for months at a time.

I do plan on getting a slim closer to the end of the console's life span, as I didn't sell my 7 or so Blu-ray movies or any of the good games. Heck, I even bought a copy of Bayonetta for PS3 on clearance 10 minutes after I sold the thing. In the short term though, I had better uses for the money I got for it and I don't have to worry about YLOD on what was a first revision model.

[jupitersj]

I purchased my 60gb PS3 when they hit $500, barely played it at the time but I finished around 5 games or so :) It died with YLOD a few months outside warranty and I wasn't going to pay Sony the ridiculous fee for just a reflow with 3 month guarantee so I've been without it all these years. Sucks because I could not watch my blu-ray boxsets >.<

My colleague had an 80gb PS3 so I still was allowed to enjoy PS3 fun, but his died to YLOD during Thanksgiving 2011 :/ I am not really happy with Sony, atleast my crappy 360 was replaced for free since its warranty was extended. I am ex IT/Hardware and take immaculate care of my possessions so I'm not really too happy with most of this current generation hardware and software(even my Wii's disc drive buzzed hardcore but Nintendo replaced it free of charge though they could not replicate the problem) except for handhelds so I won't be picking up a replacement PS3 until it hits $99 sadly.

[kupomogli]

Well damn. DAMN DAMN DAMN! My opinion just changed. got the YLOD tonight in the middle of some Dark Souls. And I've been boasting around here about how awesome I am for putting new thermal compound on my system so I don't have to worry about it for the past 6 mo. or so. So much for that! Grumble grumble. Not that I'm swearing off PS3s now, I'm just looking for a good deal on a slim... don't think the repair route is worth it.

I can hardly believe how little a ylod 60 is worth on ebay. :(

Well. You can send it in for $150 for a refurbished version of the same model. That's what I'm going to do if mine ever dies. As cheap as they are on Ebay now, I was thinking of buying up a bunch of YLOD 60GBs on Ebay and then send them to Sony to get refurbished consoles. Have a bunch of working and refurbished 60GBs in stock just in case, you know?

[Kyle15]

ALL new Blu-Ray movie playing devices are now required to only do 480p or better on HDMI. If you use analog cables with a new device, movie playback is supposed to be limited to 480i. This is the result of the Blu DRM group stepping up their control. It looks like it was supposed to happen at the very beginning of 2011, so it is a little surprising that it took until June for it to hit the PS3. So in my opinion this isn't really a complaint that should be directed (only) at the PS3, since it applies to all BD players.

I hope this doesn't get patched into older consoles later-on. (If it can be done, that is.)

[Shulamana]

I hope this doesn't get patched into older consoles later-on. (If it can be done, that is.)

I thought this was already in the newer firmware revisions, not certain though.

[TheGam3r]

My Opinion has drastically changed on PS3 since it came out in '06. I thought it was just another overpriced game console with no notable games for it (Except for Motorstorm). 6 years later, the PS3 has proved to the better console in my own humble opinion with such original franchises as LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, InFamous, and God Of War and not to mention exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of The Patriots and the original Demon Souls. The numerous remastered collections of older games has made it the ultimate gaming console of this generation in my opinion plus it even has paved the way for the Blu-Ray technology to a mass audience. just like what the PS2 did for DVDs . The Only disadvantage is that some games such as Skyrim and Fallout: New Vegas are pretty glitchy compared to their XBOX counterpart :/

[The Jack Of Hearts]

My opinion of the PS3 has definitely changed since I first saw it back in 2006. It first started in 2008 when I bought the MGS4 bundle since I wanted to play Metal Gear Solid 4 so bad. From 2008 to 2010 I would only use my PS3 for the occasional exclusive, or watching some Blu-Rays. Last year I decided I wanted to try out more game on the PS3, with turned out to be a great idea as I started to like playing most of games on one system as opposed to three.

From 2008 to now my opinion has changed from using my PS3 for a few games, and Blu-Rays to my main console of choice for my gaming needs.

[WCP]

So, the most disappointing thing about the PS3 is that you have to play it? The system would be better if there were no exclusives? But then it sounds like you wouldn't play the PS3. Maybe it's just me, but this is a strange comment about making the PS3 better.


.

Yeah, I know that my comment must seem kinda out of left field. All I can say is that I was primarily a console only gamer, and then I recently switched over to the PC. The main reason I switched over, is to try to almost get a new, next-generation console type feel with my games. It's been so long since a new console has released, so I kinda treat my gaming PC like a brand new console. The games are basically the same at 360 and PS3, since it's mostly console ports. The only real difference with the gaming PC is being able to run all the games at 60 frames per second, and being able to run it in 1080p resolution. You can also have very video effects maxed out. On certain games, the difference between the PC version and the console counterpart is absolutely striking. On other games, not so much.


What I meant in regards to the PS3, is that I really love a bunch of PS3 games, but they never get ported over to the PC. I'm talking about games like Infamous and Uncharted, etc, etc. If you look at the Xbox exclusives, they seem to eventually find their way to PC. Stuff like Fable, and Alan Wake is supposedly coming to PC. I just wish that also happened with the PS3 games. I know it's kind of a silly thing to think about from the standpoint that I'm talking about playing them on a different platform altogether (the PC). I still play my PS3, and still love it, but I still think it would be cool to play a game like Infamous on PC in 1080p at 60 frames with every visual effect set to the highest quality.

It's the graphic whore inside me.....