Amen, my friend. Amen. This thing IS supposed to be a video game machine, right?

It probably was a space issue; trying to not make the unit too big. Again, it isn't a big deal to me as long as I can still PLAY old games, but still it would have been nice to use old game saves.

Hell, I'm just happy we finally have some news of any kind.

This just in: PS3 to include toaster, but will no longer be able to hook up to your TV. :(

Once again, this ISN"T NEWS! Just because some asshat finally read the specs from E3, doesn't make it any less of a story.

I was actually refering to the fact that this thread finally had a new post after quite some time.

:lol:

Chris

Here's some pics of the 360 and PS3 side by side. The PS3 is massive.

http://www.gamesradar.com/us/xbox360...sectionId=1006

There's tons more there but this one will give you the best idea of how big it is.

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7151/ps3and360zd5.jpg

That particular one is misleading, the other side by side shots show the PS3 to be a couple of inches bigger.

All the pics are at a sort of odd angle, but I think that one was the best representation when compared to the others.

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/7048/comparecy7.jpg

http://img324.imageshack.us/img324/3337/compare2mv5.jpg

This pic makes it look like it isn't much bigger.

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/7978/compare3es4.jpg

But when you zoom in...

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/439...blownupev7.jpg

I wouldn't really say that is massive compared to the 360.

It's a good bit bigger than the 360 and that puts in bigger than the original Xbox and it got loads of shit about it's size.

It's just going to be funny when the size argument isn't important when the shoe is on the other foot.

This will espcially be true in Japan. IIRC, it was they that had the biggest (pun intended) problem with the original Xbox. If the Japanese can get behind the PS3 in spite of its size with no bitching, I'd be surprised.

I thought it was because they didn't like any of the games out for it.

That was true over the long run. There was a good deal of backlash in the beginning about size. Again, IIRC, it has been almost 5 years.

This post courtesy of Vandelay Industries in his own thread which was locked:

That's pretty bad for Sony. Even the editor of the OFFICIAL Playstation magazine isn't going to buy one at launch. You think they'd get a free one, but apparently not.

That is indeed bad news for Sony. You'd assume everyone at OPM would be singing its praises but instead it seems even they (or at least their editor) doesn't like it. :lol:

I watched a show on the HD Gamer channel and they went through all the next gen stuff. It was part of the E3 special, I think. They showed how the 360 bombed in Japan only selling 60,000 units in the first week, and much of that was supposedly based on the size. They basically said that the Japanese market didn't like it because of it's size. Maybe that was a guess since MS did get some Japanese developers, etc. to help deliver the games. :shrug:

But it should be interesting. Perhaps the Japanese gamers can deal with cognitive dissonance on the issue.

I'm getting so sick of people saying stuff like "The other big reason for people to shell out $600, BluRay, is frankly something I don't care about" like in that article. Why do so many people forget there is a $500 version as well, and it's not crippled like the cheap 360. If you don't want to spend $600, buy the $500 model.

If you don't care about Blu-Ray, you won't need an HDMI port. A majority of HDTV owners still don't have HDMI ports on their tvs anyway, so losing it isn't a big deal. Chances are, most of us who already have a PS2, XBox, or 360 already have a wireless adaptor, so the built-in wi-fi isn't necessary. If you do need wi-fi, you're looking at a $100 accessory for the 360, or it might go ahead and make sense to get the $600 PS3. Still just a $100 price difference. Not to mention the PS3 will have free online play versus $50 for XBox live, which most people on here seem to have. So now you're looking at only a $50 price difference, and if MS continues to charge for Live, that's an ongoing $50 that you don't have to pay for with a PS3. The last thing you lose on the $500 version are the multimedia slots, which are useless if you ask me.

So, with the $500 version, you still can do 1080p gaming over component if your tv supports it, which isn't even an option on the 360, free online play, and oh, by the way, a Blu-Ray player. I think that's a pretty good deal, especially since I would really like to check out the Blu-Ray without having to buy a seperate $800 or more player. Even if it's not the best player on the market, it will work fine until Blu-Ray becomes more affordable, and if Blu-Ray never really takes off, I won't be out a the cost of standalone unit. It still will provide game developers with an excellent platform to try new things with games that would have been impossible on a dvd format though.

So I'll be camping out on the release date for my $500 PS3, and I'll be happy to do it.

It is a VERY hard sell to me. Why should I camp out for a $500 PS3 when I can walk in now and get a $400 360? By all accounts the PS3 is no better in terms of games than the 360.

I purchased a PSP and regret that desision. Just goes to show that just because it says Sony on the box, does not mean that it will be a success...

I will get a PS3 when it is LESS than an 360 or when it has WAY BETTER games than the 360...

Wow, someone is actually referring a $500 system as a "cheap" alternative.

I understand some of your other comments, but this one is very strange. The Core 360 is exactly the same as the Premium 360, just with different accessories. The 'cheap' PS3 will actually have differences in the physical console when compared to its pricier version. If I was going to call one of the two 'cheap' versions crippled, it'd be the one that I couldn't upgrade to a Premium system down the road.

I'd just like to go on record and say that I used to date Dana Jongewaard back in college (she went to the same school as one of my best friends), she is a cool chick, very smart and I trust her opinion explicitly.

And I agree wholeheartedly with her here. It's too much money for a video game console. It might be cheap for a Blu-Ray player, but that's not it's primary purpose.

:lol: