destructoid.com— Sony needs to shut the f**k up and leave the PS3 alone. Cancer comes from within, not without, and right now, Sony's the biggest tumor the PlayStation brand has ever seen.
Jul 12, 2009View in Crawl 4
Gamers have become increasingly stupid over the years. The fact that you're treated to baby music while creating your avatar on the 360, complete with a belching function, and the fact the console has a 68% failure rate proves that if you treat your customers like morons, you'll never get sued.I'll stick with my PS3, thank you. Oh, and for all you haters, didn't Sony clean up at E3 for all the "Best Showing" awards this year? That's right, they did.
Yes, it means decisions made by the company that benefit us more than them.ie: PS3 letting us use cheap store bought harddrives, versus 360 charging 10 times more per megabyte for harddrives sold just for 360.Do you even know what consumer friendly means? If you did, you wouldn't have asked that.
@TeflongI own all three systems from their respective launches as well. I owned a PS2, Playstation, PSP, Xbox, N64, Sega Genesis, Super Nintendo, NES, and Magnavox Odyssey. So I have no bias toward any company or console. Sony thought they knew the gamer market and they were dead wrong. Gaming was always about cheap entertainment and not having the best box in your house. Them losing to a smaller and less sophisticated box should have been expected. Their "10 year plan" is foolish. Consoles in their prime run only last about 5 years before the competitors jump into the market with their clones.Also stating that Microsoft created HD-DVD is completely incorrect. Microsoft BACKED HD-DVD. Toshiba were the ones that created it. It would make sense to me that company A wound not want to support and include a peripheral from a competing company B? Microsoft does not want to help Sony corner the Blu-Ray market which is why they went the other route with HD-DVD. They investment in the tech was minimal. Plus once again, that was your decision to purchase HD-DVD as an early adopter. Just as those people who purchased a DreamCast felt they had the better system just not the support. Then state that as your point in your personal preference. You were stating that the overall cost of the 360 is as much as the PS3.What you should have said is that getting a 360 total media experience is more expensive. As for HD gaming consoles, 360 is hands down the cheaper alternative.
The PS3 browser WAS amazing for playing adultswim.com videos. It was the only reason I used the ps3 internet browser. Joost.com is great if you love Wondershowzen, but the new update makes the browser slow as molasses.
"You're right; major developers read Destructoid to see who they like and don't like to decide who to develop for."No, the consumers do.And major developers follow the consumers
frygarJul 14, 2009
Gamers have become increasingly stupid over the years. The fact that you're treated to baby music while creating your avatar on the 360, complete with a belching function, and the fact the console has a 68% failure rate proves that if you treat your customers like morons, you'll never get sued.I'll stick with my PS3, thank you. Oh, and for all you haters, didn't Sony clean up at E3 for all the "Best Showing" awards this year? That's right, they did.
frygarJul 14, 2009
You can't.
niceguyvanJul 15, 2009
Yes, it means decisions made by the company that benefit us more than them.ie: PS3 letting us use cheap store bought harddrives, versus 360 charging 10 times more per megabyte for harddrives sold just for 360.Do you even know what consumer friendly means? If you did, you wouldn't have asked that.
Closed AccountJul 15, 2009
I can do this too:Plugs into a tv360: yesPs3: yesWii: yesAtari 5200: yesHoly s**t it's a tie!
mrinthekeysJul 15, 2009
@TeflongI own all three systems from their respective launches as well. I owned a PS2, Playstation, PSP, Xbox, N64, Sega Genesis, Super Nintendo, NES, and Magnavox Odyssey. So I have no bias toward any company or console. Sony thought they knew the gamer market and they were dead wrong. Gaming was always about cheap entertainment and not having the best box in your house. Them losing to a smaller and less sophisticated box should have been expected. Their "10 year plan" is foolish. Consoles in their prime run only last about 5 years before the competitors jump into the market with their clones.Also stating that Microsoft created HD-DVD is completely incorrect. Microsoft BACKED HD-DVD. Toshiba were the ones that created it. It would make sense to me that company A wound not want to support and include a peripheral from a competing company B? Microsoft does not want to help Sony corner the Blu-Ray market which is why they went the other route with HD-DVD. They investment in the tech was minimal. Plus once again, that was your decision to purchase HD-DVD as an early adopter. Just as those people who purchased a DreamCast felt they had the better system just not the support. Then state that as your point in your personal preference. You were stating that the overall cost of the 360 is as much as the PS3.What you should have said is that getting a 360 total media experience is more expensive. As for HD gaming consoles, 360 is hands down the cheaper alternative.
donnikhanJul 18, 2009
The PS3 browser WAS amazing for playing adultswim.com videos. It was the only reason I used the ps3 internet browser. Joost.com is great if you love Wondershowzen, but the new update makes the browser slow as molasses.
manwithoutmodemJul 20, 2009
highest rated exclusive games? lmao kill yourself please
fredfredricksonJul 27, 2009
They could have just ignored Activision as well.
neotechniAug 1, 2009
"You're right; major developers read Destructoid to see who they like and don't like to decide who to develop for."No, the consumers do.And major developers follow the consumers
staticneuronAug 11, 2009
You haven't developed any loyalty if you are jumping ship.Enjoying games on the PS2 doesn't make you loyal. It just makes you a gamer.