I thought it was pretty serious when Sony had to bite the bullet and lose billions just selling the PS3s at the prices that they did. If it wasn't for the fact that certain companies opted for Blu-ray for their HD movies Playstation would have gone the way of Dreamcast by now.

I thought it was pretty serious when Sony had to bite the bullet and lose billions just selling the PS3s at the prices that they did. If it wasn't for the fact that certain companies opted for Blu-ray for their HD movies Playstation would have gone the way of Dreamcast by now.

If cases aren't applicable unless they actually go through. That's like saying, "If I got shot in the head when we were doing that thing I'd be dead probably." Yeah I know what the PS3 was doing. Just promoting Blu-Ray. If you want to talk numbers, yeah the PS3 is screwed royally but I kinda liked the Dreamcast personally. Now does that mean that I can't ever possibly get any entertainment out of it? Yeah, probably not.

I'm not exactly sure what we're arguing here though. Are we trying to convince me that there is absolutely no redeeming value in the technology I got? If so, then we've already proven that to be wrong since the price of a decent-quality blu-ray(low end crap from the light bulb company is probably a bad choice for a price quote) player stacked on top of a current-gen gaming system would push the total cost over the cost of just getting a PS3.

If this is about me being a smart ass, then I sincerely apologize.

If it's about both, please flog me accordingly.

If we're done here it's probably best that we keep talking about what consoles our friends own.

maybe i just don't have the eyes for it or anything but i imagine neither does the average consumer and it's only better because they're told it's better.

this is different than hidef games and tv those are actually pretty big differences.

I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about VHS/DVD but over time DVDs got better so the difference is pretty clear.  in a few years I'm sure the difference between DVDs/blue-ray will be much more noticeable

however I have yet to actually watch a blue-ray movie so I don't know nuffin

I'm just saying that the HD player wasn't free and the inclusion of it had some pretty severe consequences all around, and it's only by a stroke of luck that the console is still alive. I'll leave it at that though because yeah, this has nothing to do with the topic.

Btw, Dreamcast was my favorite system of all time until the PSP came out and did the same thing (only portable). The ability to make boot CDs with emulators and VCD players was amazing.

Everyone I know has a PS3 and 1-2 of the others.

I have a PS3 and a 40" Sony Bravia that does full HD.
Other than that I have a PS2, PS1 and a PC that does HD gaming also.

The only Nintendo products I own are the GBC and the original DS.

Theres nothing worse than going to someone's house and being forced to play Wii. This guy made my gf play Wii once so that he could watch her tits bounce about (Wii sports boxing). I hated that guy.

I must know about 15 people who own a Wii, I know a few guys who have 2 XBoxes since they just got together and bought a new one when it broke.

I know 5 people with PS3s and they are mainly into Cod4/5 which to be fair is something they could've played on 360. They all play their PS3s on standard def TVs through composite too which totally defeats the object.

I seriously know nobody with just a PS3 and a handful of people with a Wii and 360.  Aside from Blu-Ray, you can get 90% of the PS3's library on the Xbox 360.  You can get 90% of the 360s library on the PC but Microsoft gets your money either way.

partially related:

that picture goat posted is sort of accurate really. Except that the PC has a vastly dwindling number of exclusives these days - even shit like COMMAND AND CONQUER is being consolized. GTA releases on consoles first these days, Mirror's Edge did, Call of Duty is available on every platform, Mass Effect saw a console release first, even freaking Civilization got a console exclusive game! I mean, there are definitely great PC games, and given the choice, the PC version is often preferable (Fallout 3, Team Fortress 2, the aforementioned Command and Conquer etc). But I think it's a rapidly blurring line, the distinction between CONSOLE and PC I mean.

Plus, if you were to ask me what games I'm looking forward to, the only PC answer I'd give is Starcraft 2. On the flipside, I can name like five XBOX games I'm excited about.

More on topic, after three years of the current consoles, I can see the insight in Moore's comment. The PS3 really is a lousy choice, ultimately. It still practically costs as much as a Wii and 360, at least if you get a cheap 360 package like the Arcade bundle. But it offers barely any exclusives: nearly every great PS3 game is available on the 360 too, and hell, sometimes better on the 360. Achievements are a strangely fun thing to unlock, and just look at Fallout 3 - only 360 and PC owners will get the huge DLC packages Bethesda is working on. PS3 owners are actually SOL. So if you're looking at one of the "powerful" next gen consoles, the 360 is a simply a more desireable choice. it has nearly everything the PS3 has going for it, plus more.

The Wii is a different choice, as it features radically different (and frankly, often annoying) controls, as well as the weakest hardware of the three by far, but it has a lot of quirky exclusives that you don't see on any other console, which makes it interesting in its own right.

So I guess Moore was on to something. I don't really have many friends who play games at all, I'm sort of the nerdiest guy I know with one or two exceptions, but I still think Moore was probably right.

partially related:

accurate but i play probably my 360 probably 80% of the time with real life friends!

That chart is absolutely wrong.  A PC capable of playing all the current top of the line games would cost almost as much as all three consoles put together.  Better and cheaper to get a Wii or 360 with 15-20 games.

Besides, the PC doesn't have anything coming out that isn't on a console, with the possible exception being Star Craft 2 and Diablo 3. 

Most of my friends have a Wii and 360, while others either have just a PS3 or all three.

I think Peter Moore could've been right...

Since most people end up buying a desktop computer at an inflated price, why the hell not just slap a good video card in there and a decent processor and game it up? I mean, the price of PCs is AMAZINGLY HIGH if you're looking to just play video games, but obviously that is not the only thing PCs are good for. Just one of the most apparent things.

In any case, the PC can be used to play almost any game from the last generation given you don't mind being a miscreant. Plus, the PC can play all of those CUHRAZY RM2K games. Of course, Action Game Maker is changing that. Partially.
If you actually look, there is a much more vast library of games for the PC than there will ever be for any given console.
ever.
Most of them are just made by indie developers who give them away for... free!?
"But most games made by indie developers SUCK BALLS."
Yeah, sure that is true, but without the PC developers the world wouldn't be graced with games like Cave Story(I still don't understand the fascination with that game but since there is one I might as well name it off) or La Mulana.

Plus there's mods. Sure some console games allow mods, but from what I know it doesn't seem like they do it very well at all. The PC World has literally made it redundant and absolutely retarded to own HL2 or TF2 on a console if you have the PC with a power to push the games. Why? Because of the almost insurmountable number of mods of which have given the source engine almost infinite replay value. Did you like Fallout 3? Did you get it for a console? Chances are you wasted your money. Not only is it slightly cheaper if you buy it for the PC, but the mod community has been pumping out shit for the game ever since it first showed up. The same "sucks balls" rule applies to mods though. Most of them suck, but by god if there aren't some gems.

Sure is easy to assume the PC isn't worth the money. I dunno, maybe I'm an old fashioned kinda guy, but personally I think if I had a choice I'd probably buy a gaming PC over a console because I'm going to end up buying a PC anyways.

Man I'm horrible when it comes to keeping on track.

i dont like pc games. whoaaaaaa.

nah but for real they are boring unless its some indie developer shit. oh no!

IM GONNA MISS OUT ON CRYSIS!