http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/pl...n-3-blu-ray.ars

The revolution will not be televised, it will be downloaded an update at a time

"Back in the crazy days before the current generation of gaming consoles, the console you bought at retail was the console you had for the life of the hardware. My SNES acts exactly the same now as it did when it was first released, and outside of the addition of Xbox Live, the first Xbox system remained largely unchanged throughout the hardware's life cycle. Those days are long over, and now which version of Sony's PlayStation 3 that you bought is only one part of the equation: welcome to the firmware wars."

Found the article link on GT which refers it back to Digg. It's one of the most popular topics right now and has garnered a huge response!

Digg: http://digg.com/playstation/They_say_it_go...view_of_the_PS3

I'm going to read this, all of it.

The SNES/Genesis days were a world apart. You chose each purchase with a deftness that would have embarrassed any modern gamer. You literally lived with your mistakes. Luckily there were a lot of must-have games courtesy of Nintendo, like Pilot Wings, Zelda etc etc

What genuinely surprised me was the admission from Gouken that the PS3 was outselling the PS2. I find that hard to believe, but I'll take his word for it. (fanboy or not!) j/k

The thing I cared most about in that massive list was the price reduction, which I honestly had not heard about yet. I still don't want one, but it's almost an okay purchase if enough decent games come out on it in the future.

I'm not a Sony fanboy, please don't put me in that catagory. But most of the talk and charts I see from GT and VG indicate the PS3 is selling faster than the PS2 did when it had it's start-up. I think the PS2 really picked up when FFX and MGS2 were released.

It's still hard to believe the PS3 is selling better though than the PS2 first did. When PS2 was released I bought one and about 20 friends bought one same day. Now I know about 3 people who own a PS3 and don't much care for it.

yeah its hard to believe. everyone had a PS2. I don't know anyone with a PS3. I remember hunting for a ps2 for months after launch. and them being sold out everywhere. since the ps3 was released there have been stacks of them in every store around here.

I don't believe it either. Must be Sony "massaging" the number to look good.
Businesses always do that to gain market confidence.

This information wreaks of bullsh!t.

Kinda like the high scores a lot of sh!tty games have been receiving lately, if anything Sony took a strat from Micro$ and started to pay off the numbers.

I never really supported the PS2 so it's a shocker to me as well. I loved my dreamcast until this generation of consoles and wanted a multimedia unit and the PS3 was pretty much it. I bought a PS2 1 year before getting a PS3 because it was a broken system and wanted to train myself on how to repair them.

because I don't believe the ps3 sold better then the ps2 for a minute I did a little digging.

first year comparison of the PS1, PS2 and PS3. from an article on ps3fanboy.com. the whole article is here: http://www.gamerzplanet.net/forums/trash-c...ps2-vs-ps3.html
I can't find the original PS3fanboy post. the search function on that site doesn't work well.
the article trys its best to spin (it is ps3fanboy after all) but it is obvious that the ps3 did nowhere near as well as the ps2.

Well, it did better than PS1 that is 2 generations back though

You have to remember Sony was the new kid on the block in the PSX era. It was competing with Nintendo (SNES and N64) and Sega (Mega Drive and Saturn) at that time, and both were established brands. Not to mention crap like the 3DO... Although it ended up winning and selling 100 million units, its first year isn't surprising.

Both the PS2 and PS3 owe a lot to the PlayStation brand that the PSX earned the respect for.

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS2...ll&weeks=82

That's a chart from a non-biased site (or so I've heard). It shows that in the same time span the PS3 has outsold the PS2 for a bit. Of course we all know the PS2 sold like hotcakes starting around this time.

Anyways, so enough of comparing charts, what about the topic? Did anyone like the article or even read it?

Just too bad the Nelson figures aren't released to the public anymore.

It has come a long way but I do not think it is the best blu-ray player on the market (as an affordible one, most likely yes), but the prices in blu-ray players is dropping as well.

Online infastructuer, while centralized (Good), it still needs alot of work to become a top tier service to match Live's Gold.

Well written, but I'm still waiting for the games.

I for one, am getting sick of the MULTIMEDIA BOX craze. I want a GAMES CONSOLE, get rid of this multimedia CRAP, that's what I have a PC for, and that's what HTPCs are for.

GTFO and stop charging me for stuff I don't want. This is probably half the reason the Wii is selling so well.

break it down by major region:
america
Japan
Europe
total other
the only place the PS3 has sold better then the PS2 is Europe. and that was only 2 small humps. admit it, your claim that the ps3 has sold better then the ps2 is complete crap.

Well lets see, at the time I saw those figures it was selling better, then it slumped, then it sold better. Keep in mind that I've owned a PS3 since nearly the beginning so my head is garbled up with all sorts of news and figures I receive from GT and VG. It's not crap, it's just not relevant now.

Will people stop trying to poke holes in my statements (which I never said was fact, but is by what I see now) and just read the damn news?

I was thinking the same thing. I haven't used any of my systems to play a single movie or music or stream or whatnot. I use them for games only.

I read the article all the way through, yes it was really well written and pointed out how the PS3 has been improving. The PS3 "could" be the best someday.

walmart is giving a $100 gift card with purchase of any blueray player. including PS3. that may be incentive for me. I'm still thinking it over. It would be a no brainer if it were piratable.

That's because you are capable of using your PC and/or a HTPC. I know a lot of people I know can't play an avi because of a missing codec. What's a codec pack they say? What's x264? What do you mean convert it to DVD format, how do you do that? etc etc

So many people I know bought a PS3 primarily because of it's multimedia capabilities, like it seems have a lot of it's user base. They just want a system that will play these avi, mp4, hd content etc natively, no questions asked, no complications.

Personally I don't have a HTPC. My Xbox1 w/XBMC and 360 play virtually any file I throw at them. Yes, sometimes I need to tweak/convert, but the fact that I don't have to have a separate HTPC just to play/stream multimedia content is a big plus.

Totally agree

Similar to how Sony marketed the PS3 as being more powerful then the 360? Something that has been proven false.

Yeah, like the rumor that X360 couldn't handle VF5. It has been proven false now.

The PS3's number crunching capability smokes the 360's. Even as an Xbox owner I have to admit the hardware in the PS3 is far superior- the main problem is that it does not translate to a better gaming experience at all.

The hardware is awesome but the platform fails and that isn't the machine's fault- it's Sony's for a long line of poor marketing and design choices.

Since all the chips are made by IBM, both X360 and PS3 should house the same capability. Only how the chips are utilized is different for each consoles. As of now, it seems that X360's chips are utilised better and provide more efficiency. This is evident on games that are cross-platform. Also, the 2X speed of the blu-ray drive did not help.

Chips in these machines are also produced by nVidia and AMD. But that is irrelevant- they are completely different chips. The two systems have wildly different capabilities, potential and actual, even if one chip in each may come from the same vendor.

I agree the 360 hardware is being utilised better, but the hardware itself is far from identical to the PS3's.

They are different, bottom line. That doesn't mean that they both can't provide the same experience. Like with the PS2 (I hope no one has forgotten how hard it was to program for that compared to the DC) it will take time to take advantage of what the PS3 can do. I understand this. Which is why when people say "My 360 game looks better" I have a "Just wait" grin on my face.

While they have an 'I don't have to wait' grin on their face.

Not to mention that the full graphical capabilities of the PS3 may never be realised, or at least on a small scale like the Saturn was, due to it's own 'difficult' hardware.

You can wipe that smirk off your face MGS4 came out already ty.

In other news, Halo 3 got a higher score story-wise the MGS4 on GTTV.com, power to the players?

How does Master Chief dying in a car crash signify a good storyline?

well you actually get to play the game not watch it unfold in cut scenes.

MGS4 is more of a movie than a game. O_O

a 60 dollar movie.....

Halo's storyline is subpar at best. Nothing close to the MGS storyline at all.

True, I had a friend over who adores his 360. We've always fought on which system is better, but at least we're good at giving the other points for when something actually goes right. He really wanted to see MGS4 and what the hype was all about. So I let him play the Alaska level for a bit.

He flat out told me the 360 could not do it. My friend, the biggest xbot I know, told me the PS3 has it's game finally. He hadn't seen my PS3 since before the store redesign pretty much and it wasn't very exciting to look at. But now it's definitely shaping up.

Anyways, I thanked him for the compliments and then showed him how gimped In-Game XMB is. I love the message function, but they need to flesh it out more.

Yes, like people said the Genesis couldn't 'do' SF2. Yes, it couldn't compete with the SNES version on most levels, but they did it and played to the system's strengths, improving it in some areas. Sure the 360 couldn't replicate MGS4 as it stands, but they could still pull it off.

Oh yea, definitely, but it won't happen. Their is a lot in MGS4 that just can't be ported besides the graphics.

Example: iPod

Microsoft will not allow such a feature to be in the game because they are supporting their Zune player. How would Apple feel if it was taken out? I'm sure Konami and Apple have a contract.

But on the technical side, the HDD is used heavily for this game and making it for the 360... things would need to change, drastically. Pretty much everything would have to be recoded, everything. And a new way of implementing the game on the 360 would have to be devised. It would be to costly in my opinion, besides, the game is selling incredibly well on the PS3. If it wasn't, I would see Konami sweating and doing a port to recoup losses, that's if Sony and Apple would let them.

Luckily I'm not an MGS fan then

Friends that have this have all praised it very highly though. It's a pity a port would be as difficult as you pointed out. I'd still like to play it, fan or not.

I enjoyed every minute of it. Sure some parts you're just going to be watching and not playing, but those are the perfect parts to grab that snack you've been meaning to get and learn more about the story and characters. It's a great blend of movie and game, and Kojima pulled it off perfectly.

If you ever get the chance to play it, i suggest you do. Even if it's years and years from now and the PS3 costs 100 bucks.