So far: Liking my PS3 Slim, but...

DragonMasterAlex said:
Definitely will, especially uncharted. Killzone 1 was a rotting turd of a game, so I'll probably just rent 2 before making any purchase decisions, but I do understand that it looks phenomenal :)
Click to expand...

I played Killzone when it came out and could not get myself to finish it, but Killzone 2... omg... the graphics are the best i've seen on a console yet (along with Uncharted 2) and it's a very fluid experience throughout. And also, the multiplayer is very good too... so if you like shooters then Killzone 2 is a no-brainer.
 
zamardii said:
I played Killzone when it came out and could not get myself to finish it, but Killzone 2... omg... the graphics are the best i've seen on a console yet (along with Uncharted 2) and it's a very fluid experience throughout. And also, the multiplayer is very good too... so if you like shooters then Killzone 2 is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

agreed, one of the best multiplayer games, non of this boom headshot, boom headshot, boom headshot shit you see on most other games, but thats for another thread!!
 
zamardii said:
I played Killzone when it came out and could not get myself to finish it, but Killzone 2... omg... the graphics are the best i've seen on a console yet (along with Uncharted 2) and it's a very fluid experience throughout. And also, the multiplayer is very good too... so if you like shooters then Killzone 2 is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

I'm not a shooter fan, but I played through the Killzone 2 demo and...yeah, it looks nice, but it's hardly what I'd call an "OMFG, what a leap forward!" kind of game. It's a fairly pedestrian FPS, from what the demo delivers. I'd give about $10 for it, but that's about it.
 
Dreaz said:
Stop this nonsense. MW2 runs on an engine older than MGS4. It's perfectly fine to compare the two in the graphics department.
Click to expand...

Except that the engine has been touched on from MW1 to MW2? Notice how much more detailed the weapons are in MW2 than MW1? The textures of the environments seem less muddy as well...
 
People who are complaining about the download and then install can just queue a bunch of demos or downloads before going to bed and then shutdown the PS3, it will ask if you want to finish the downloads or not.
Select the shutdown after downloads are done and we you get up in the morning, they will be downloaded and installed automatically.

I know it is just a work around but if you queue what you download and step a way from the PS3, they will be ready next time you are ready to game.
 
zero940 said:
Except that the engine has been touched on from MW1 to MW2? Notice how much more detailed the weapons are in MW2 than MW1? The textures of the environments seem less muddy as well...
Click to expand...

That's not likely the engine, that's the models and textures created by the game's modellers and texture artists
 
boxterduke said:
People who are complaining about the download and then install can just queue a bunch of demos or downloads before going to bed and then shutdown the PS3, it will ask if you want to finish the downloads or not.
Select the shutdown after downloads are done and we you get up in the morning, they will be downloaded and installed automatically.

I know it is just a work around but if you queue what you download and step a way from the PS3, they will be ready next time you are ready to game.
Click to expand...

That's what I've resorted to. Still, when you come back, you then have to INSTALL them, which in some cases is fine (30 seconds) but other cases is absurd (5-10 MINUTES). There is simply no excuse outside of "poorly thought out demo package design" for needing to install these demos.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
That's what I've resorted to. Still, when you come back, you then have to INSTALL them, which in some cases is fine (30 seconds) but other cases is absurd (5-10 MINUTES). There is simply no excuse outside of "poorly thought out demo package design" for needing to install these demos.
Click to expand...

I think I would turn die and turn to dust if I was forced to wait an absurd FIVE MINUTES for something.
 
ocellaris said:
I think I would turn die and turn to dust if I was forced to wait an absurd FIVE MINUTES for something.
Click to expand...

Not really the point. Point is, as a GAME CONSOLE, it's absurd for its demo download system to be designed in such a way. You know how long it takes to install a 360 demo once it's downloaded? Oh, wait: it doesn't take ANYTHING, because they're ready to run as soon as the download finishes, no installation required.
 
I think the extra install times are worth the fact that your console won't overheat and explode while you're playing it.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Actually, my PS3 runs at least as hot as my Xbox, maybe more so.

Also, since when do they EXPLODE? Nonsense. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I was talking about the failure rates. Everyone I know has replaced their 360 at least once. Sometimes out of warranty. But I haven't heard of anyone's PS3 breaking down. I'm sure it happens, but not on the same level.
 
wolfen22 said:
I was talking about the failure rates. Everyone I know has replaced their 360 at least once. Sometimes out of warranty. But I haven't heard of anyone's PS3 breaking down. I'm sure it happens, but not on the same level.
Click to expand...

I think you could honestly say that the majority of PS3's don't see near the play time that the majority of Xbox's do. I know a lot of people who own PS3s and never play them. I know a lot of people who own both consoles, and play the Xbox a ton more.
 
FatStackSeeker said:
I think you could honestly say that the majority of PS3's don't see near the play time that the majority of Xbox's do. I know a lot of people who own PS3s and never play them. I know a lot of people who own both consoles, and play the Xbox a ton more.
Click to expand...

Some people have been folding on PS3s for years now. That is with the unit turned on and running @ 100% CPU the entire time. If just being turned on and working was going to cause a lot of the failures, these people would have figured this out long ago and there would be a ton of people like "Don't fold on this, it killed 3 PS3s for me".

Also PS3s have been put to use for encryption and encoding work. If PS3s died from just being turned on a lot, they would not be appropriate for that type of work.

So yeah some PS3s fail just like everything else, however trying to claim that it is because no one is using them seems a bit foolish.
 
Last edited:
I have both systems and I rarely even turn the xbox on , in my case the ps3 gets the majority of the playtime, plus I love movies in blu ray and have started getting every new release that I want in BD format.I get most of my games in ps/3 format but I have the 360 in case there is an xbox exclusive i can't do without. My xbox is the super elite model with a jasper chipset. I'm less worried about this xbox model crapping out than the older models. I see no real difference in the value of either system both have thier pluses and minuses and both play great games so I see any arguing over which system is better as stupid.
 
For me I’d say my PS3 and 360 get roughly equal playtime just, but I got through phases where one gets more attention than the other.
For instance right now I’m mainly only using the PS3 for Blu-Ray/DVD’s, but in another two months who knows what games I’ll be playing. 4 months ago my 360 would go a week or more at a time between uses while my PS3 was getting used left and right. Lately now I've been playing my 360 daily.
It just depends on what games are out at the time.
 
FatStackSeeker said:
I think you could honestly say that the majority of PS3's don't see near the play time that the majority of Xbox's do. I know a lot of people who own PS3s and never play them. I know a lot of people who own both consoles, and play the Xbox a ton more.
Click to expand...

xboxs dont see much playtime full stop!!
 
wolfen22 said:
I was talking about the failure rates. Everyone I know has replaced their 360 at least once. Sometimes out of warranty. But I haven't heard of anyone's PS3 breaking down. I'm sure it happens, but not on the same level.
Click to expand...

There's no question 360 had a higher failure rate, most of that attributable to the Year One consoles. Today's 360's are just fine.

Also, we've heard of people's PS3's breaking down right on these very forums numerous times. Do a search of ebay for "dead PS3" or "broken PS3" and see hundreds of results. It happens :)
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
So, here’s my thoughts so far:

LBP is *awesome*. Blows away almost every other game this gen, especially the “realistic” garbage! BRILLIANT art design!

MGS4 looks pretty good, but certainly no better than games like Modern Warfare 2. Controls suck, but I got used to them after an hour or so.

God of War Collection kicks ass. Looks very nice. Clearly still just an upscaled PS2 game, but the filtering and other enhancements make it passable, like a first gen PS3 or 360 title almost. Still a great game!

PS3 itself-is not a consumer friendly product *at all*. Out of the box I had to manually enable Optical audio out (connecting an HDMI cable automatically disables all other audio output. Why? Silly!), then find out which codecs my receiver supported and manually enable those before it would work. The download of the firmware update was fast (5 minutes) but the install was retarded (literally, 30+ minutes. WTF?). Software updates to games are unbelievably slow. 2 HOURS to update MGS4 so I could play it, 20 minutes to update LBP. Mind you, I’m on a 10MB connection, and the downloads themselves were speedy enough, it’s the installation process that's slow, which is systemic. Four other friends have told me that's the way theirs are as well. Why is it so mind numbingly slow?

Installing demos after download is lame and varies wildly. Fairytale Fights took about 30 seconds, Ghostbusters about 5 MINUTES. Why? Ridiculous.

DVD playback is GORGEOUS. Easily the best upscaling dvd player I’ve ever seen, not even a question. Pisses all over the 360’s upscaling and even passed up my dedicated DVD player’s upscaling. Nice indeed. Haven’t played or bought any bluray movies, but I don’t really care, either. Only way I’d buy the bluray version over the DVD version is if they were the same exact price, *maybe* a dollar more. With the upscaling, though, I don’t think there’d be a need in most cases anyway.

Audio output is phenomenal-easily better than 360’s, especially on DVD’s. Star Trek sounds and looks better than ever when played on the PS3.

The lack of an IR port for the universal remotes is lame, as the selection of Bluetooth capable remotes is simply awful. And the dedicated PS3 dvd remote is garbage, useful for absolutely *nothing* but the PS3, it has no IR port for compatibility with other devices, making it essentially useless. I’ll just keep using the controller, I guess.

I love the design of the slim. It’s sexy, relatively small (compared to the phat) and has a nice finish instead of that “ghetto fabulous” gloss crap on the old model. I’m still not sold on the controller, because even though it’s dual shock 3 it still feels a little too light and flimsy compared to the solid heft of a 360 controller. It’s also not nearly as ergonomic or comfortable, but then, we’ve been dealing with the exact same controller shape since 1995, *sigh*.

All in all, I really like the system. The games, of course, look about the same as 360 games, but the audio is way better (and I’m using an optical connector on both), especially on movie playback. It doesn’t do *streaming* as well as the 360 does (for some reason the PS3 stutters video from Hulu, streamed via PlayOn media server, while the 360 does not, from the same server. Errors in the server event log indicate that PS3 doesn’t handle the DLNA implementation correctly, which is probably why. Hopefully it gets fixed in a firmware update).

I love that I can stream stuff from the PS3 to the PSP, I just wish the PSP had a more reliable battery. Even my double capacity battery only lasts about 3 hours with wifi enabled. So far the functionality of streaming to PSP from a remote location over the internet is spotty-sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, which is a bit of a drag, but to be expected.

Anyway, glad to add the system and a few games to my library. So far I have MGS4, LBP, Warhawk and GoW Collection. I plan to snag Motorstorm next week, since gamestop has it for $9.99 used, and it seems like a nice HD Excite Truck type game, so hopefully I’ll enjoy it.
Click to expand...

I'm confused... why would you praise it's upscaling and audio capabilities and then turn around and say you'll never buy a blueray? lol, just makes you seem uneducated to me about picture quality and audio... which the PS3 slim has a huge advantage over the original model as it can bitstream the latest (AND BEST) audio formats.
 
Focker said:
which the PS3 slim has a huge advantage over the original model as it can bitstream the latest (AND BEST) audio formats.
Click to expand...

A huge advantage or just nice to have ? ;)

Bitsteaming to a receiver doesn't sound "better" than when the PS3 decodes Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD itself, outputting multichannel LPCM over HDMI. It's a lossless process. The only practical difference is what indicator light is displayed on the receiver.

However CD audio and DVD picture quality supposedly aren't quite as good with the slim as with the original PS3 fat. At least they doesn't measure as well. I don't know how perceptible the difference really is.
 
Focker said:
I'm confused... why would you praise it's upscaling and audio capabilities and then turn around and say you'll never buy a blueray? lol, just makes you seem uneducated to me about picture quality and audio... which the PS3 slim has a huge advantage over the original model as it can bitstream the latest (AND BEST) audio formats.
Click to expand...

In the first place, I didn't say I would never buy a bluray. I said I would never buy one to replace a DVD I already own, or buy one at an inflated price compared to the DVD version. I understand the format just fine, including its strengths and weaknesses. Some movies look great on bluray, some look awful, and some just make so little difference that the added resolution is of no value. In either case, I won't be paying a premium to get the bluray version. If I were to find myself faced with the DVD and the bluray of a movie I do not own, and they were the exact same price, *maybe* $1 difference, I'd buy the bluray. Any more than that and it's a big no-thank you.

Also, PS3's audio advantage isn't remotely "huge", it's relatively minor, and in most cases, on most equipment, with most movies--the vast majority of people would be utterly unable to tell the difference from the other audio formats already supported. I'd go so far as to say that those who claim they can tell a "night and day" difference are abject liars with a weak ego, pretending to hear something the rest of us don't so they can imagine themselves some sort of superior. :)
 
you'd only pay $1 dollar more for the bluray version? your one tight bastard! on new releases here in the UK blurays are only £3 more which is an absolute bargain imo
 
Usual suspects drinking Sony koolaid I see. Heaven forbid any little negative thing comes out of someones mouth. The world is ending ladies.
 
^
Obvious troll is obvious.

6a00d83453081f69e201156f813e46970b-800wi

koolaid rocks
 
kool.gif


How can I have anything bad to say about it yet? I'm playing a bunch of games that will never be released on my PC. And after spending 8 hours a day sitting in front of my PC, I kind of want to step away from it.
 
Rash said:
you'd only pay $1 dollar more for the bluray version? your one tight bastard! on new releases here in the UK blurays are only £3 more which is an absolute bargain imo
Click to expand...
Screw paying £16 a pop for blu-rays. I buy at £6.99. :D
 
Focker said:
I'm confused... why would you praise it's upscaling and audio capabilities and then turn around and say you'll never buy a blueray? lol, just makes you seem uneducated to me about picture quality and audio... which the PS3 slim has a huge advantage over the original model as it can bitstream the latest (AND BEST) audio formats.
Click to expand...

I still dont get people who think upscaled dvds look remotely close to blu-rays. Most BDs are very good quality over the past 2 yrs, there were some pretty bad ones originally, but by far virtually every BD release is far superior(audio+video) to any upscaled dvd equivalent.
 
I'm a tiny bit of an audiophile and I can tell you that if you can tell a significant difference between having the PS3 decode HD codecs and bistreaming them - YOU SHOULDN'T BE USING THE PS3 TO PLAY BLU-RAYS.
You clearly have some really good speakers set-up and a really high end receiver. You should be using one of those high-end dedicated players.

The difference between normal Dolby and Dolby-HD (or LPCM) is pretty big, but the PS3's PCM decoder is a good one by normal standards. If you can tell a significant difference - you're slumming it by even using the PS3. Be aware that the volume might be different when bistreaming, so that doesn't count as a difference.

For everyday use for people who have a home theater that was under 3 or 4K, the PS3 will work just fine and other than the volume you're not going to notice any differences.

The people that care about these things are serious audiophiles with really good set-ups or crazy ears. The only way there would be a difference using a normal set-up is if the movie had audio that was poorly encoded in one format or another or the PS3's decoder hit some kind of a bug with a certain movie.
 
I said 5 minutes to download 90MB, which is something that(based on my connection speed) should only take 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
So I assume you have a ~30Mbps connection? I'll agree PSN isn't as fast as I'd like it to be, but for being free I usually find it more than adequate. Whenever I need to download and install something I just start it and go get some food. When I come back with my food it's usually done.

On the topic of saying MGS4 could have been done on the 360, I guess if you split the game into two/three dvds yeah; but honestly who wants to do that? Glad to see your enjoying it though. :3 The story and gameplay is absolutely superb. If you want a challenge, try collecting all 40 emblems. It took me a few playthroughs and a good week or two of nonstop playing, but I got it.

Online play (MGO) is actually pretty awesome imo. Lag will sometimes be a bitch, and M4haxheadshots can get annoying in the higher levels, but nothing beats running up to someone with a shield and bashing them unconscious so you can follow up with a handgun headshot. Also, if you have green camo in some levels when you lie in the grass people will actually not see you and you can own them. :p My favorite moment was turning a corner into a room where there were 3 enemies. I grabbed one hostage and immediately sprayed(one direction only) to the right with my machine-pistol headshotting one of them, and continued turning while switching into the crouch position and headshotted the second guy. Then I choked out my hostage and headshot him as well. :3 It has a lot more depth then a simple FPS like MW2, but the non-dedicated servers and cheapness of headshots in the higher levels will sometimes offset that.
 
Deadgye said:
On the topic of saying MGS4 could have been done on the 360, I guess if you split the game into two/three dvds yeah; but honestly who wants to do that?
Click to expand...
That's not really a great argument though it it... it would have taken considerably less time to swap a disc than wait for the install before each act. ;)
 
Rash said:
you'd only pay $1 dollar more for the bluray version? your one tight bastard! on new releases here in the UK blurays are only £3 more which is an absolute bargain imo
Click to expand...

I'd say it's a complete ripoff. Bluray can't make a shitty movie worth watching, and a great movie is worth watching even at 480p. I don't think I should be paying extra for what amounts to a nicer transfer of the same original material just because the new disk format holds more.

Thanks, but no thanks.
 
4saken said:
I still dont get people who think upscaled dvds look remotely close to blu-rays. Most BDs are very good quality over the past 2 yrs, there were some pretty bad ones originally, but by far virtually every BD release is far superior(audio+video) to any upscaled dvd equivalent.
Click to expand...

And yet, no bluray has yet been released that looked and sounded so good as to make a shitty movie any more worth watching :)
 
Deadgye said:
So I assume you have a ~30Mbps connection? I'll agree PSN isn't as fast as I'd like it to be, but for being free I usually find it more than adequate. Whenever I need to download and install something I just start it and go get some food. When I come back with my food it's usually done.

On the topic of saying MGS4 could have been done on the 360, I guess if you split the game into two/three dvds yeah; but honestly who wants to do that? Glad to see your enjoying it though. :3 The story and gameplay is absolutely superb. If you want a challenge, try collecting all 40 emblems. It took me a few playthroughs and a good week or two of nonstop playing, but I got it.

Online play (MGO) is actually pretty awesome imo. Lag will sometimes be a bitch, and M4haxheadshots can get annoying in the higher levels, but nothing beats running up to someone with a shield and bashing them unconscious so you can follow up with a handgun headshot. Also, if you have green camo in some levels when you lie in the grass people will actually not see you and you can own them. :p My favorite moment was turning a corner into a room where there were 3 enemies. I grabbed one hostage and immediately sprayed(one direction only) to the right with my machine-pistol headshotting one of them, and continued turning while switching into the crouch position and headshotted the second guy. Then I choked out my hostage and headshot him as well. :3 It has a lot more depth then a simple FPS like MW2, but the non-dedicated servers and cheapness of headshots in the higher levels will sometimes offset that.
Click to expand...

What I meant about MGS4 is that, there's nothing about the graphics that couldn't be (or at this point, hasn't been) done on 360. You might have to split it up over 2-3 DVD's, I suppose, but that's not really an issue, IMHO. Perhaps you don't remember the PS1 days when the sheer number of disks a game came on corresponded to how awesome a game it must be :D
 
Psychotext said:
That's not really a great argument though it it... it would have taken considerably less time to swap a disc than wait for the install before each act. ;)
Click to expand...

I should have read further before responding, but that's an excellent point, actually :). Some of those installs were freaking EPIC, heh.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
I'd say it's a complete ripoff. Bluray can't make a shitty movie worth watching, and a great movie is worth watching even at 480p. I don't think I should be paying extra for what amounts to a nicer transfer of the same original material just because the new disk format holds more.

Thanks, but no thanks.
Click to expand...

im not talking only about shitty movies, im also talking about the best movies, movies you dont even own on dvd, makes me wonder why the fuck did you buy a hdtv in the first place considering you were so excited about it in the 90s!!
 
Rash said:
im not talking only about shitty movies, im also talking about the best movies, movies you dont even own on dvd, makes me wonder why the fuck did you buy a hdtv in the first place considering you were so excited about it in the 90s!!
Click to expand...

Primarily for HD games, not movies. In most cases, the HD makes little difference to whether I'll want to watch it or not. For example, I'll happily watch a great film such as American Beauty or The Lord of the Rings in 480p and never regret a moment. But I don't care how high a resolution you pump Transformers 2 into, that piece of dog shit will never be worth wasting 2 and a half hours of my life on. Not Bluray, not Super-Dee-Duper-Ultra-Mega-HD in 99,000P resolution on a 5,000 inch Uber-Plasma with Laser Comb filtering will make that kind of GARBAGE worth my time.

Succinctly, bluray is utterly useless for making bad movies worth your time, and while it won't harm your good movies, those movies are every bit as worthy of being watched in upscaled DVD.

There isn't a single movie I've enjoyed more as a result of the resolution of bluray, but there are some I've enjoyed LESS (Pirates of the Caribbean, which looks like it was shot with a camcorder on bluray).
 
While I agree that Blu-Ray doesn't affect the movie experience that much, there are a lot of movies that went to DVD back when the format first came out and the transfers/audio/features/etc. are all horrendous. It can be worth re-buying some movies as a Blu-Ray just because the DVD was so bad.
Too bad some Blu-Rays have the same problem, though.
28-days Later on Blu-Ray actually looks identical to the DVD version, it just has slightly better audio.
 
Domingo said:
While I agree that Blu-Ray doesn't affect the movie experience that much, there are a lot of movies that went to DVD back when the format first came out and the transfers/audio/features/etc. are all horrendous. It can be worth re-buying some movies as a Blu-Ray just because the DVD was so bad.
Too bad some Blu-Rays have the same problem, though.
28-days Later on Blu-Ray actually looks identical to the DVD version, it just has slightly better audio.
Click to expand...

See, now I'd be PISSED if I spent money on the bluray to have that happen. And while you're right, a lot of older dvd's did have shitty transfers, I don't think I actually own any. Also, there are very few movies I like well enough that I feel I need to pay for them AGAIN :). I love the LotR movies, for example, and own the full extended edition sets, but I'll be damned if I'm buying them all over again. The DVD's *already* look and sound great :)
 
Yeah, thoe LOTR movies hold up really well as the DVD's are an excellent transfer.
In general, when looking at Blu-Ray movies at Best Buy, if they're $10...the transfers typically suck. Granted the normal DVD's are usually the same price, though.

Some of the movies I'd reconsider as a Blu-Ray would be the ones that were 4:3 but letterboxed to hell and called "widescreen." Those are the ones that look like a tiny rectangular box of a movie surrounded by 2/3 blank space on a normal HDTV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top