Aja on 19/8/2009 at 17:53
Preferring the input device is a valid reason to choose one system over another. Dual Shocks have always been awkward and a little uncomfortable.
Sulphur on 19/8/2009 at 18:18
Yes, and while that may be a justifiable opinion, it has little to no relevance to the discussion currently.
As a throwaway comment in between everything, it comes across as a little snide; you probably didn't mean it that way, but your post seems like something of a glib retort.
Aja on 19/8/2009 at 18:24
"I think xbox online is a ripoff"
"well I prefer playstation's games"
"yes well xbox has a better controller"
that's all it was, guys.
Sulphur on 19/8/2009 at 18:28
Well then, this thread must be tagged appropriately.
It's all about the bottom line, gentlemen.
EvaUnit02 on 19/8/2009 at 18:59
@gunsmoke
A HDD is required for BC on 360.
gunsmoke on 19/8/2009 at 19:12
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
@gunsmoke
A HDD is required for BC on 360.
Oh yeah. I forgot that you had to download those emulators, burn them to discs and whatnot. Hell, I guess I would rather just get a second Xbox for $40.
SubJeff on 19/8/2009 at 20:06
I apologise Aja. I thought you were just being a dick with your controller comment.
I realise now that you really would choose one system over another, regardless of price difference, feature difference, game availability and whatever else because you like one controller over another.
I don't know which is worse tbh.
Papy on 19/8/2009 at 21:44
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
$50 high for a console? Compared to what? Not PC gaming, certainly.
Compared to the use I could have of a gaming console. Even if I buy the PS3 for its blu-ray player, there's a good chance I will never play a single game with it. So $50 just in case, is a bit high.
Quote Posted by Matthew
I'm in a somewhat similar position, but I think the flexibility in updating the PS3 to potentially accommodate newer BD profiles (such as the jump from Profile 1.0 to BD-Live that has already taken place on the PS3) will probably swing my vote that way.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but with the exception of cheap devices, I think all players can have firmware update to do that sort of things.
I must admit I still have my doubt about buying the PS3 as a player mainly because I had a lot of problem with Sony's devices, particularly DVD players (they all have difficulties reading discs other players can read without any problems). In my mind, Sony was a great company in the 80s, but now I rate them at about the same level as Magnavox or Acer.
Quote Posted by Aja
Preferring the input device is a valid reason to choose one system over another. Dual Shocks have always been awkward and a little uncomfortable.
Kids nowadays... Back in my time, with play Intellivision and Colecovision controllers and we were fine with them.
SubJeff on 19/8/2009 at 21:51
Quote Posted by Papy
Even if I buy the PS3 for its blu-ray player, there's a good chance I will never play a single game with it. So $50 just in case, is a bit high.
Then I really don't know why you are posting in this thread. Its clear that everyone else here is considering it as a games console with Blu-ray as a bonus. If all you are interested in is a Blu-ray player why not buy something else?
In any case the specs, price and specifics of the PS3 Slim are not something that should really be concerning you imo since there are much, much cheaper Blu-ray players out there. Go look up Blu-ray players or post a thread on Blu-ray players in an appropriate place.
Aja on 19/8/2009 at 22:00
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I realise now that you really would choose one system over another, regardless of price difference, feature difference, game availability and whatever else because you like one controller over another.
hmm, it really sounds stupid when you put it that way.
