The thing is, part of what made the Playstation series such a big seller was their exclusive titles. Games like Final Fantasy, Grandtheft Auto, Devil May Cry and Resident Evil could literally go make a gamer go buy a Playstation system.
Now with Sony dropping the ball on so many previously exclusive titles, gamers are free to explore other systems other then Sony's money making machine the Playstation.

I have also owned a PS3 and a Wii, I currently own a Xbox 360. As a matter of fact, at one time I owned all of the systems. The Nintendo Wii, while it may have been an intresting diversion for some games, could get old fast. When I first got my Wii, my friends and I played Wii Sports non-stop for about a week and a half. After that I got the new Zelda game and I played that for a time. After that, there was a serious lack of any good games for the system. Add to the fact Nintendo is basically preventing developers for putting online game play on it and the Nintendo Wii is right at the bottom of my list right now.

I then ended up getting a Sony Playstation 3. When I first got it, I got Resistnce, Virtua Fighter 5 and Oblivion. Virtual Fighter 5 was nothing but Fan Fare with no online options. And Resistnce Fall of man was like a button masher FPS. I was not impressed. I was though, impressed with Oblivion (At this point I never played the X360 edition).
The Sony Online Store is not only very slow and a pain in the ass to navigate, but I feel their prices are way too high. I also felt a little ripped off, I paid a lot of money for the PS3 and their damn new Bluray DVD player and yet I didn't have any Bluray DVDs. And to be honest I don't plan on buying any. I feel as though Sony is trying to force us to buy their new media and I don't like that. We don't need 3 different types of DVDs and I feel Bluray is set up to fall.

So anyways I ended up getting rid of my PS3. There was a serious lack of games and I was using it mostly to play PS1 and PS2 games. But that didn't work very well because Sony used software emulation on the PS1 and PS2 games and not all of them worked! I would get random crashes on almost all of my old titles and some of them just refused to work. Not to mention with Sony losing all of their exclusive titles I no longer felt as though I had to be dedicated to Sony.

So finally I got a Xbox 360, the price was perfect, after selling my PS3 I got a Pro Xbox 360 package and a stack of games. I really enjoy how Xbox Live is set up and I am really liking the games that are being put out in Xbox Live Arcade. Online games are handled very nicely also. The Xbox 360 already had a great line up of games for me to play and I purchased a number of them. A number of cross platform games that appeared on both the Xbox 360 and PS3 looked exactly the same to me. In the end, I ended up loving my Xbox 360 a lot.

Really, all that power doesn't do Sony a lick of good when they don't use it, I have been comparing games for awhile now and I see no noticeable graphical difference. With Sony's lack of exclusive titles, expensive price tag and powerhouse hardware not being put to use, I don't feel the PS3 is a decent system right now. And to be honest, I have been feeling shafted by Sony for awhile now, I hope they fail horribly this next generation and end up backing out of the market, perhaps leaving room for a new competitor to enter the race.

The PS3 is pretty great and it is getting atleat some third party suppot (unlike other consoles, such as the Wii) so it's not in dead last.

I'd say it ends up this way: 360 > PS3 > Wii (counting the games out and games coming out)

So atleast you're not in dead last. ;)

I just have to say, I got a Wii at launch. And I'm still having fun with it, Madden is a blast, The Godfather is one of the best games I've ever played, Wii Sports - Let's just say I can freaking augment my daily run and workout with some boxing and tennis, and Red Steel - hell of a lot of fun. Oh and LoZ Twilight Princess, again one of the best games I've ever played.

There are tons of great games out/coming out for the Wii. In the next couple months I'm going to try to pick up:

-Mario Strikers Charged(Finally some Online Play)
-Mortal Kombat Armageddon
-No More Heroes
-One of the Resident Evil Games

Keep in mind that this is the first console I have ever bought in my life. Ever.

I haven't had the chance to play a PS3 yet, but I have played the 360 a lot.

It's pretty insanely boring. I feel like I've played every single one of their shooters before on my computer, they're nothing new. Which is one of the reasons that I would never pick up an Xbox 360 or PS TRIPLE, bitches.

When Halo first came out everyone was all best shooter ever. Sorry if I don't find moving around an analog stick and clicking a small green button exhilarating after playing computer FPS'.

That's not to say the 360 isn't a great console, I mean if you like bad shooter mechanics and lots of gore than this thing is for you. The games are definitely in general more mature. The Wii has it's fair share of mature games too.

The PS 3 looks like it can do some beautiful things with its hardware. Unfortunately $600 doesn't justify buying the same but very slightly prettier "meh" experience I can get with an Xbox 360.

I've seen a lot of 3rd party support for the Wii. Definitely not as much as the 360, but a decent amount. The PS3 well...

Finally, Nintendo isn't preventing developers from putting online play on their console, they just were infuriatingly slow with setting up the infrastructure.

All this talk makes me want to go play some Wii!

Yeah you're right if you want fpses get a computer. Because fpses never get old when you have mods~

Uh bull crap Nintendo isn't preventing developers from putting online game play on their titles. Many developers are reporting that they have wanted to install multi-player options that involve online game play but Nintendo will not allow it.

Otherwise you explain to me why a game like Call of Duty fails to have online game play on the Wii when every other edition does.

Another title would have been Mario Party 8. That would have been a great title to put online multi-player on, but yet again, no online support. So far the ONLY game announced for online is the new Metroid, which is complete and utter bull crap.

Finally your a bitch. There is no reason to call anyone a bitch. Jesus. Talk about a insane fan.

LIke Weaver said, no launch title was online, and they are starting ot come out after Pokemon Battle Revolution. We get online Mario Strikers Charged in July, Madden in July and FIFA sometime this year(And thats from last month's NP).Btw, Madden doesn't even use the Nintendo online service, it uses EA's..Read Nintendo Power people or the internet, and you shall be informed of the wii...0_0 Also, I believe someone said Wii is lakcing in the third party department..Not true..x.x Like I said in a post maybe some weeks ago, a new game is announced for wii almost everyday. Look around the interwebs!

Now in response to the post, I think it probably is a okay system, yet I haven't played it(Me nor anyone around me will be touchingi t anytime soon with that pricetag 0_0). But basically, they tout the system as being a graphical powerhouse and the ultimate in media for your living room, but don't deliver(according to fans and critics). Really, saying its the best power-wise may have been good for sales, but not quite the best thing to say when not alot of the games either use it and/or are not fun to play despite developers needing time to becoem accustomed with the system.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/the-tide/ big-japanese-publishers-shift-from-sony-to-nintendo-271785.p hp

I don't care what Weaver said. The fact is, The Xbox 360 and PS3 had launch titles that were online. Nintendo touted the fact that their new system would finally be online and look at what happens. Games like Call of Duty, that SHOULD have online don't. And I am not willing to give Nintendo any excuse on that part. Hell, the night my friend got a Wii (Launch Night: 12:00) the Nintendo Wii online servers weren't even working properly yet.

Revenant Jesus wrote:

I don't care what Weaver said. The fact is, The Xbox 360 and PS3 had launch titles that were online. Nintendo touted the fact that their new system would finally be online and look at what happens. Games like Call of Duty, that SHOULD have online don't. And I am not willing to give Nintendo any excuse on that part. Hell, the night my friend got a Wii (Launch Night: 12:00) the Nintendo Wii online servers weren't even working properly yet.

Yeah they did tout it being online(It IS integreated with online), and it was from day one..I accessed the Virtual Console and updated my system hardware on launch date, maybe yer friend's conenction sucked..0_0 Despite that, good things come with time, and if you have no patience, only you miss out(I'm impatient, but I damn sure am waiting and am dealing with it). Just like the DS, there was no online for a super long time, but its successful now despite complaints of FCs. Even though we haven't had online games(and we do now have one in America right now), you've had downloadable games, a internet browser, the everybody votes channel(although I don't use anymore), wetaher channel, news channel, and a little messaging service. Seriously, you sound about as angry as a launch date 360 buyer that got a red ring of death(high failure rate, and as I'm informed, reamins to be high). They were still working on the online play and its finally done obviously. Give Developers time to actually implement it. Online doesn't automatically make a game better, but don't rush for a crappy online when we can wait and get decent to good online.

Besides all that, there are plenty games to play that should tide you over. If there's not a single one that interests you besides ones you have or don't have, you're most likely extremely picky. Admittedly they're lacking in the Adventure, FPS, and some other areas, but if not one game interestes you, yoou might have a problem.

WarLin wrote:

Lets get to the point now. I personally think that the Playstation 3 has a bad wrap because of its immense price tag which media can use to nail Sony and say that the ps3 is just a graphics machine and doesn't have any ingenuity. Of course the fact that they ripped off the Wiimote didn't help either >_>. The fact is, I own a ps3 and it isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be. I can say this because I have played the other consoles. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying its better or anything. It's just not that bad. Most of the games that came out around its release date were given horrible scores and very mean looks. Well I played these games >=\.

Well, to be blunt, the PS3 is just a graphics machine with no ingenuity. That, and it's a vehicle for Sony trying to pimp Blu-ray. They've lost in the format wars before, though, so why they're pushing so hard is a mystery when they could always build players for both formats for now.

Saying "If you own one, it's not so bad" is one thing, but the price tag means that if it's priced too high, you won't own one. And it is priced too high. Sony is losing about $200 per console of course because it costs much more than they sell it for, but they can't move the inventory they ship because the console prices itself right out of the market even when taking a loss.

I've been following the blog Dubious Quality, which goes into depth in its analysis of the console market. The author is right: Consoles are a $299 market, making the Wii cheap and the 360 and PS3 both too expensive. The 360 does better because it's only overpriced by about $100. The PS3 costs double what the market will bear, so it sells very few units in comparison. Alarmingly few. It may be a great machine in many respects, but it costs too much for what it is, unless you're really keen on converting your media library to Blu-ray.

While some comments might boast, "This isn't what we expected from next-gen graphics and the ps3 is a huge disappointment." Heres the fact: The graphics are better than that of the ps2s graphics even if they aren't MUCH better. Think about this : When the playstation launched the graphics for the opening titles were not much higher than that of a Snes game.

Who gives a crap about opening titles, really? At that point you've bought the game.

The fact that the graphics aren't much better is a pretty big factor in people deciding whether they want to pay twice as much. If, quantitatively, you can say there's a 20% improvement, then why the much bigger price jump? The problem is, graphics cards are reaching a point of diminishing returns even with the introduction of HD formats. And even if the graphics upgrade is a necessary thing, what's so important about having Blu-ray capability included?

They say when selling a house that a pool or a hot tub is an "attractive nuisance". It's nice to have but it actually lowers the ideal selling price because it's a maintenance cost. Yet to a family, it might be a boon, and they might pay more. Sony's done the same thing by bundling Blu-ray support with their next-gen unit.

I have to admit, there is no funner game than Super Paper Mario, which I beat :3. That game alone would redeem everything the Wii did wrong. Notice the would potential flamers.

I'm not clear on why you think the Wii did something wrong. It's marketed to a very nontraditional market for gamers, which has the potential to vastly expand the market itself, not just keep pumping money out of existing gamers--who, frankly, shell out way too much. A paradigm shift like this is just the thing to drive the gaming industry into a better and more profitable direction, while also improving the imaginativeness of new games. I won't claim the Wii is the end-all-be-all, but it's kicking the other next-gen consoles' butts on several fronts for some pretty good reasons.

In any case, the point is the Ps3 is just getting very bad media because if its monster price tag and I'm sure you might agree if you got one yourself. Maybe its not the best console but its defiantly not the worst choice.

Defiantly not? It defies being the worst? Based on the price tag alone I'd say that's not true.

Darn skippy the console is getting bad press because of its price tag. It makes as much sense as setting up a Lexus dealership next to a trailer park. Huge prices basically mean they're marketing only to people who must have the very latest consoles always, must play the very latest games for said consoles, and will pay any price. The set of improvements over the PS2 is not great enough to warrant the price, and the Blu-ray player is, as I said, an attractive nuisance.

As a thought exercise, consider how much better the PS3 would be doing if it came out in a new edition that dropped Blu-ray in favor of straight DVD, and did not lose Sony money on each console. Say they sold it for $400, matching the 360. They'd still be overpriced for the market, but their sales would soar (by comparison to their existing sales). In the meantime the 58% cheaper Wii is actively attracting new customers who previously had no interest in console gaming.

Discuss amongst yourselves and leave me out of it because I already said what I was going to say.

It's a lot of useless fanboy raving, nothing more. I heard this same crap from Knifo, only he kept trying to harp on the idea that Blu-ray actually increased the value rather than just the price of the unit. Basically all you're saying boils down to: "Why you all hatin' 'cause the PS3 costs too much?" Because it costs too much! Duh! It doesn't deliver in features what $600 ought to promise, in a market that isn't readily prepared to shell out more than $300 in the first place. (For a bit of amusing irony that hammers my point home, look here.)

For the record, I am not a console fanboy of any stripe. I own a PS2 and DS (both gifts), and my fiancée owns a Wii and a DS of her own. She wouldn't have bought a console if the Wii's brand new style of gaming hadn't reached out to her; the DS she wanted because of Puzzle Quest, and she's gotten her money's worth out of it. I'm an old-school gamer, and so the obsession with always having the best and trendiest graphics while sacrificing gameplay annoys the crap out of me; so I have little patience with console warriors.

Lummox JR

I still say the blu-ray is a plus for the system. Not a plus that warrents a $600 console, for sure, but it does allow the console to be ready for the future. As graphics are being pushed more and more, filespace for said graphics is getting less and less. The blu-ray gives the developer way more room for textures and world content. Two things that are very important in "HD" gaming.

In that respect, the ps3 is set to be capable of hosting the best looking and biggest games. Although, that doesn't mean best.

I agree that making the machine $600 was a mistake, but they where attempting to one up Microsoft on every part of the system, and they did a pretty good job.

Another often over looked feature of the PS3 is processor power. It is a computing machine! This means that physics based games, RTSs with lots of troops, and about anything with a lot of AI can do better on the PS3 than the 360 and Wii. Once again, this doesn't mean the best, but it helps. Sony just should have shaved a little off. At the same time, the only things I can think of that they could have cut(without putting themselves below the 360) would be power and graphics, but everyone(AKA "Hard core gamers") is so obsessed with the statistics of everything that if they would have dropped them, everyone would have just wrote the machine off as nothing special. They would just ignore the wifi in the $600 model, and the harddrive in both of them (many developers feel crippled by the 360 only having a harddrive in the top model).

I think the PS3 is a solid machine. It is lacking some areas(price point mostly), but is a great console once you start using it. The interface is good(but the playstation network isn't great. It works, but could be better), the graphics and gameplay are smooth, and the arcade games up for download have been great so far(I've bought most of them). There are some great games coming out later this year, which will add to the value of the machine.

Now, I'm not saying that anyone should run out and get one, just that it does get a bad rep for things besides the price. Heck, I really wouldn't recommend it to anyone who isn't A: A Sony console lover or B: Wants all the consoles. But it is a good system, just not $600 good.