AI capabilities will not give the PS3 any advantage over any gaming system except the Wii, atleast not in this gen. The new Xbox 360 exclusive Bioshock promises to have the most advanced ecosystem based AI on any platform yet, and more advancements are sure to come. And certaintly we haven't seen any advancements in the graphics yet, other than perhaps lighting, and that could be due to several factors that has nothing to do with the system itself. For instance your t.v. settings. I think the max MGS4 could achieve would be to be somewhat equal on terms of AI with the 360.
Originally Posted by Barronmore
If you're not upset by the fact that you're paying $600 for a system that isn't delivering on what was promised you're either not as smart as you think or an over zealous Sony fan. Sony will be " in s**t up to their necks" if they can't prove that Blu Ray is needed becuase that is the only card they have to play when it comes to justifying the price point with casual gamers, that and graphics, which has also yet to be seen as superior. Who is going to buy a system for $600 that hasn't been proven worthy of the pricepoint when there is a another perfectly capable system like the 360? This has already been seen taking effect, since some have read the reviews on the system many have simply whent out and bought a Wii or 360 (the shortage this holiday season undoubtedly also contributes to that).
Why would Sony be "s**t up to their necks" if the blu-ray is not an immediate feature of gaming? Does it some how lessen one's enjoyment of the system? Have I somehow been ripped off because the game I have in my hand doesn't use all the blu ray space? Should I be upset every time I buy a PS2 game because only one game that i know of uses the entire first disk (Star Ocean)? Why not just judge the game on it's own merits and not judge Sony as a success for failure because a developer does not use the full potential of media and machine.
No, that hasn't been shot down. Currently there are around 10,000 units sitting on Ebay, plus another couple thousand sitting in store shelves, that haven't been bought since launch. PCworld Magazine? This isn't a PC, it's a gaming console, they are two different things. This relates to what I said before, PC gamers usually know every aspect of the technology they are using and how to fully exploit it. Casual console gamers do not, and don't want to have to deal with the hassle of figuring out how to fully tap into their machines, as with the PS3, which is why they bought a console in the first place. PC gamers might like it, but a casual gamer who doesn't have the time/money or drive to fiddle around with it won't. I'll get to the whole wasted tech thing in a sec -
I just don't understand all this anti-PS3 sediment on the net lately. All I've ever heard is how much the PS3 is going to cost and now no one will buy it. That's been shot down, hasn't it? Then it was, it's not really worth the money. PCworld magazine says it is. Now there's the whole wasted technology aspect. There's less then 30 games out for the system and were supposed to make a call on how good the system is/isn't or rather it's being used to it's full potential?
Yes, they have to yet to come, and yet to come they will stay for a very, very long time according to some analysists. Some predict that it could take up to 3-5 years in order to fully tap into the PS3's power. Most gamers don't want to wait that long, and if any can then it's hats off to their patience :hattip: . This is the reason why rumors are flying that there will be no PS4. Or that it will at least skip a generation before being marketed, Sony wouldn't want to release another console when it's predecessor has yet to be fully realized.
Give it time. If were sitting here 2 years from now and all that's improved is the graphics, then i'll start to agree with you. But judging the success/failure of the PS3 on launch titles just seems silly to me. The games that will tax the system are yet to come. And some of those games we won't see until were hearing/seeing rumors of the PS4.
I'm not saying that the PS3 is a crappy console, I'm saying the tech it utilizes is ahead of its time, and should have been used later on when developers and gamers knew how to use it, or Sony could have made it easier to tap into. On the contrary, that is saying that this console is spectacular (and anyone who says different obviously doesn't know what they're talking about), but the fact that it will take such a long time to develop is a huge disadvantage. Any gamer who knew their stuff and kept updated would probably see what I am talking about, and most, despite their fandom, might decide to take the straigher road(360 or Wii) instead of the winding street known as the PS3.