PS3 Hacked?

[SparkyGoBlue]

Man I'm glad I have the 60 gig.  If I didn't have PS2 and PSX BC I'de be pissed...   

Same here.  I actually bought an extra 60 gig last year as a backup, because I thought they'd be hard to get a hold of and/or the prices on them would go through the roof in the next few years.

[DJ_Izumi]

Well, they can ALL play PS1 games.

[Haze]

I just ant to play PS2 games on my PS3 like we were originally promised.  I'd hack it for that.  Unless Sony starts selling PS2 games on PSN, then all would be good.

You'll be lucky, the only reason it worked on the original systems is because they had half the PS2 hardware in there.  Without that hardware you'd be limited to running a software emulator, and PS2 *software* level emulation is nowhere near the quality needed to play games on a PS3, and probably never will be.

I own both systems, and while the recent press about Sony possibly acting against the used games market by having one-time redeemable codes for online play annoys me, as does the limited access to the hardware from Linux (and complete lack of it in the later models) I don't really think it being cracked would be a good thing at this point.  It's the less popular of the two systems by quite a margin, but a lot of developers still see it as worth porting their games over, and even developing exclusives because they're guaranteed sales as opposed to simply having their games copied.

For titles which are on multiple platforms in 99% of cases the XBox versions appear to be superior, the PS3 suffers with framerate issues, and overall (despite the hype) is in my opinion the weaker of the two systems as you have far less general purpose CPU power available (1 PPC core. vs 3 PPC cores) even if you have 6 extra SPEs (which are effectively special purpose cores) on the PS3.  The problem is, a lot of tasks can't be split easily across multiple cores, and while the SPEs are powerful, and fast they also have strictly limited access to memory, and if you're not careful you'll just end up with severe contention issues in your game / code.  This may explain why the cross-platform games are weaker, as the Xbox is easier to program for as it is generally closer to a PC, and PCs are almost used for development.

That said, I've actually enjoyed the exclusives on the PS3 a lot more than the ones on the XBox.

MotorStorm Pacific Rift is a great game, all action racer, very arcadey, and honestly the most fun I've had with a racer since Hydro Thunder.

Lair, despite the bad reviews is pretty good once you've got the patches installed so you're not forced to use the motion controller for certain actions.

Demon's Souls is a proper gamers game, and while it lacks a little polish, and in reality isn't a huge game it's a challenge that you'll keep coming back to because you want to beat it.  Took me ~60 hours to complete the game once, but you can play through it again and unlock / upgrade to new weapons the 2nd time through (in which the enemies are 50% tougher!)

Katamari Forever is great fun if you like rolling things around (although their use of the motion controller for jumping is annoying as you can accidentally trigger it without wanting to)

Heavenly Sword is worth playing, albeit a little short.

Infamous reminds me of a futuristic Assassins Creed.

The game that I worked on a while back 'Geon' has it's best version on the PS3 (PSN), as it was developed a long time after the XBLA version and contains significant enhancements (I'd actually consider it to be a different game completely as it makes the XBLA version look more like a prototype concept, almost everything has changed)

LittleBigPlanet is a fantastic retro experience, and great with 2 players, it's a shame so much of it is online content tho, it would be nice to see some BluRay discs released with 'the best content' because I'm not a big believer in online content / games because I know they're only a temporary thing, and once the servers get shut down they'll be gone for good.

"3D Dot Game Heroes" is almost a remake of the classic Zelda games, I've played it on import, but I'm waiting for an actual US / EU release to buy it.

Uncharted 1/2 are well made cinematic experiences, with some shooting elements, and some stealthy elements which remind me of the original Metal Gear Solid more than MGS4 does.

The Rachet & Klank games are what you'd expect from such games, cutsey experiences and they actually make pretty good use of the motion aspect of the controller

KillZone 2 / Resistance are probably my least favourite of the exclusives.. They're just generic FPS games and remind me more of the Xbox games I was already bored of.

There are also a good selection of other PSN exclusives, which again I wish had Blu-Ray releases (some do in Asia, but nowhere else for some reason)

I doubt GT5 will be any good, Forza 3 on the 360 has covered all bases, providing everything from an arcade experience to a serious simulation depending on your choice of options.  The developers of GT seem too stuck in their ways, and are unlikely to produce anything except a game with a lot of content (half of which I imagine you'll have to buy after the game), but dated gameplay.  I'm not looking forward to it at all, and it's not even on my radar.

To say it's a better system than the 360 would be foolish, it definitely lacks some polish, but to say it's not worth owning is equally foolish as the exclusives really are worth playing.  Most games will install anything from a few kb to about 4gb of data when you first run them, and most have significant patches to download after installation (while this indicates good support, it's also a bit annoying that you can't just download them and copy them to a memory-stick for offline installation)  MGS4 is the only game I've played that has significant ingame installation periods.  The controllers are lightweight and charge via a standard USB cable, and as stated you can swap the HDD for a larger one if you feel the need.  The whole 'home online community' thing is a bit of a joke, it's been compared to Second Life, but the only point of Second Life was that you could build and program your own items, the home thing is just a glorified chat-room where they want to sell you extra items and clothing; it's not worth either your time, nor the space it takes up.

I do fear that if the system is cracked a lot of developers will stop developing for it due to the much lower user-base, and greatly reduced chance of any profits, and as a result the machine will end up going the same way as the Dreamcast.

If you have one of the 'fat' models where you can run linux it is actually possible to compile, and run MAME on them right now.  However, performance isn't great, and definitely isn't comparable to a modern PC.  As far as MAME is concerned all you have is one relatively weak PPC core to run the emulator on.  The SPEs are useless for emulation (which isn't something suited to lots of small tasks) and even if you did have access to the full system hardware you wouldn't really see any benefits as far as MAME is concerned.  It's a nice novelty to be able to play with it, but if you're expecting to play anything slightly demanding in MAME you're far better off sticking with a cheap modern PC as the PS3 simply doesn't have the CPU power.

Anyway, that's my honest opinion on the systems as an owner of both

[shmokes]

Jesus!  You had a lot on your mind.

Anyway, I agree with lots and disagree with lots.  But I'll only mention a few things that strike me as very likely misguided.

First, I think the absolute only thing stopping a software PS2 emulator is a lack of commitment on Sony's part.  The PS3 is pretty clearly just as powerful as the Xbox 360.  Either system boasts one thing or another that is better, but all-in-all they are at least on par and most developers seem to agree on this point.  If the 360 is, on the whole, more powerful it isn't by much.  In short, there has never, ever been a game on the 360 to which one would say, "This could not be done on the PS3."  The original Xbox, however, was noticeably superior to the PS2 in every way imaginable.  So my layperson conclusion is, if the Xbox 360's multicore PowerPC CPU and ATI GPU can emulate the original Xbox's x86 CPU and Nvidia GPU all in software, I'm confident that the PS3 is equally capable of emulating the inferior (to the Xbox) PS2 CPU and GPU in software.  Sony included the PS2 hardware in the PS3 because they lacked the will to develop an emulator, not because it was impossible (probably).

Additionally, you mention that the PS3 is the less popular of the two systems by "quite a margin".  This is true in the US, but the PS3 has always been WAY ahead of the 360 in the important Japanese market and most European markets.  PS3 leads the 360 worldwide.  So I'm not really sure that the PS3 is really such a questionable value proposition for developers compared to the 360.  This doesn't seem to be the case either intuitively or empirically (i.e., the system has wide multi-platform support).

A final point worth mentioning is that the 360 was, in fact, hacked a long time ago.  360 DVD drives could be modded to play backups since years ago and that so far has not seemed to deter development for that system.  The PS3 is already sitting in more than 20 million homes, well beyond critical mass, and those numbers are increasing rapidly thanks to last fall's price cuts.  By the time it is hacked, if it ever is, that number will probably be 30-40 million and modders will never make up more than a small portion of customers.  Not to mention that the actual number of software sales lost to piracy isn't even remotely close to the number of games pirated. For example I have like 100 Xbox games on my Xbox that I never paid for, but there are only a few of those that I would have purchased if stealing wasn't an option.  Developers are perfectly cognizant of this dynamic.  They only cite the absolute number of games pirated when seeking damages in court.  Otherwise everyone is perfectly aware that relying on the number for anything other than academic purposes is absurd.

But don't get me wrong.  I don't think the PS3 is better than the 360.  The 360's overall library is very likely a bit better, particularly if online multiplayer is your cup of tea.  And it's cheaper.  I just disagree with some of your analysis.

[Haze]

Jesus!  You had a lot on your mind.

Anyway, I agree with lots and disagree with lots.  But I'll only mention a few things that strike me as very likely misguided.

First, I think the absolute only thing stopping a software PS2 emulator is a lack of commitment on Sony's part.  The PS3 is pretty clearly just as powerful as the Xbox 360.  Either system boasts one thing or another that is better, but all-in-all they are at least on par and most developers seem to agree on this point.  If the 360 is, on the whole, more powerful it isn't by much.  In short, there has never, ever been a game on the 360 to which one would say, "This could not be done on the PS3."  The original Xbox, however, was noticeably superior to the PS2 in every way imaginable.  So my layperson conclusion is, if the Xbox 360's multicore PowerPC CPU and ATI GPU can emulate the original Xbox's x86 CPU and Nvidia GPU all in software, I'm confident that the PS3 is equally capable of emulating the inferior (to the Xbox) PS2 CPU and GPU in software.  Sony included the PS2 hardware in the PS3 because they lacked the will to develop an emulator, not because it was impossible (probably).

Additionally, you mention that the PS3 is the less popular of the two systems by "quite a margin".  This is true in the US, but the PS3 has always been WAY ahead of the 360 in the important Japanese market and most European markets.  PS3 leads the 360 worldwide.  So I'm not really sure that the PS3 is really such a questionable value proposition for developers compared to the 360.  This doesn't seem to be the case either intuitively or empirically (i.e., the system has wide multi-platform support).

A final point worth mentioning is that the 360 was, in fact, hacked a long time ago.  360 DVD drives could be modded to play backups since years ago and that so far has not seemed to deter development for that system.  The PS3 is already sitting in more than 20 million homes, well beyond critical mass, and those numbers are increasing rapidly thanks to last fall's price cuts.  By the time it is hacked, if it ever is, that number will probably be 30-40 million and modders will never make up more than a small portion of customers.  Not to mention that the actual number of software sales lost to piracy isn't even remotely close to the number of games pirated. For example I have like 100 Xbox games on my Xbox that I never paid for, but there are only a few of those that I would have purchased if stealing wasn't an option.  Developers are perfectly cognizant of this dynamic.  They only cite the absolute number of games pirated when seeking damages in court.  Otherwise everyone is perfectly aware that relying on the number for anything other than academic purposes is absurd.

But don't get me wrong.  I don't think the PS3 is better than the 360.  The 360's overall library is very likely a bit better, particularly if online multiplayer is your cup of tea.  And it's cheaper.  I just disagree with some of your analysis.

I'm not quite sure where the idea that the online multiplayer on the 360 is much better comes from.  To be honest, my experience with the PS3 online has been just as smooth, and you don't even have a monthly fee.  Maybe it lacks a bit of the polish and I'll admit I'm not a big online player, but even with Demon's Souls which I had to import because it's not out here the experience is smooth and enjoyable even if it's connecting to US based servers.  For games like Unreal Tournament you've also got the option to play with Keyboard / Mouse, which is a big plus if I want to play that online (although to be fair, I haven't tested that one online yet)

As for the userbase, I'm in the UK, and I know 5 people who own PS3s vs 40+ with 360s (entire blocks of student flats), and likewise the range of games onsale in local stores has a similar ratio, 1 rack of PS3 games vs 6 or 7 of 360 games.  I don't really see why my sample would be too skewed.  If the PS3 sold in equal numbers I really don't know where they all ended up.

As far as emulation is concerned, the original XBOX is a much simpler design than the PS2, yes, it was without doubt more impressive, but they'd done little more than take some standard PC componenets and shoved them in a box.  The games were written to use DirectX, there were tight controls over direct hardware access, and most games conformed to some sort of standard.  This makes software HLEing of parts of the games much easier, you'll note that Microsoft's emulator isn't capable of running just any old game you throw at it because they have to fine-tune it to each game, and rewrite parts of the games, it's part emulator, part port.  Thankfully as a lot of games did things in the same way it's fairly easy to intercept common calls and replace them with native code, the games that didn't were tricker.  Common examples would be if a game used a known physics engine then the physics engine could simply be recompiled from source for the PPC, and all calls to it in the original software replaced with calls to the native version.  DirectX calls would likewise simply be remapped to native calls, with some patches added where there were ATI/Nvidia incompatibilities.  It's not an automatic process.  If you remember the old UltraHLE N64 emulator it's similar, most of the hardware wasn't actually emulated, common calls were intercepted, and to expand the supported library the games had to be patched instead.  A lot of games didn't work, were very glitchy, or simply couldn't ever work with that approach.  I imagine there are games Microsoft simply can't support on the 360 because they push the hardware too hard, and they don't have calls which can easily be replaced.

The PS2 was a more complex piece of hardware, harder to program for, and much more heavily abused by the programmers.  Emulating it entirely in software is no easy task.  The complexity of the original systems and the nature of the development tools used on the systems both have a dramatic effect on the difficulty of emulating them, it's not something that can easily be judged based on the quality of the games released for the system.  I've emulated enough hardware, and written code for enough systems to be able to make that statement ;-)

[DJ_Izumi]

Haze, basing your views on the size of the install base on nothing but your personal experiences is silly and unscientific.

Total offical sales of the PS3 are at 33.5 million units and offical sales of the 360 is 36 million for 2009.  These stats were published 7 days from each other.

Now, it's obvious that in Japan there are utterly poor 360 sales but in Europe and North America the PS3 has done fairly well, it has particularly had a huge comeback with the PS3 Slim release.  The thing is holding it's own now.

You also neglected one of the 360's unique features; a readily available VGA RGBHV output cable.

[shmokes]

Yeah, you live in the one European market where the 360 has outsold PS3 (well, Scandinavia too, but only by a hair).  But even in the UK the numbers aren't so far skewed as your experience suggests.  Perhaps it is just your demographic (college kids), but that people with more money, e.g. college graduates, skew the numbers back toward PS3 a bit or something.  The current numbers, btw, are:

   
UK:               PS3 - 2,924,039     Xbox 360 - 4,649,360
France          PS3 - 2,213,749      Xbox 360 - 1,807,229
Germany        PS3 - 1,674,076      Xbox 360 - 1,355,969
Spain             PS3 - 1,314,540     Xbox 360 - 696,667
Italy              PS3 - 1,338,661     Xbox 360 - 1,116,768
Scandinavia    PS3 - 832,534        Xbox 360 - 893,418
Other Europe   PS3 - 1,496,423     Xbox 360 - 1,106,922

Sorry . . . I don't know how to use table tags.  That's about as good as I can make it look.   

[Haze]

Haze, basing your views on the size of the install base on nothing but your personal experiences is silly and unscientific.

Total offical sales of the PS3 are at 33.5 million units and offical sales of the 360 is 36 million for 2009.  These stats were published 7 days from each other.

Unscientific maybe, but these are people who are going out and buying games, and they're certainly not talking about PS3 games.  The game stores offering a far smaller selection of PS3 games would also seem to indicate they don't sell as many, which is backed up by people I know who work there.  Maybe more PS3 owners order their software online? Maybe a lot of the PS3s were sold for research purposes, not gaming? (in which case you can add another 10 to the number I know owned, but I don't count them as they'll never run games and so it won't matter if it's cracked or not as game purchases for those units are 0)  Maybe they were bought as blu-ray players?  Is using statistics and sales figures which seem to bare little resemblance of what I'm actually seeing somehow more professional and more scientific, or is it just acting blind to what's in front of me?  Was RATM really the most popular christmas #1 choice here, or did some crazy people go out and buy 6 copies each to skew the sales figures because of some online sites telling them how they could do that without spending anything? (I'm not complaining)  Stats and charts can just as unscientific as personal experience and I've always found 'Industry Figures' to be especially dubious.

Developers I've talked to say that some of their multi-platform games are selling equally well on the PS3 as on the 360, again against their personal knowledge of the install bases.  A lot of them put this down to piracy, there are less people using the PS3 for games, but they are actually buying the games.  It's quite an odd situation because the sales figures don't seem to reflect what people I know see around them at all, and the 360 figures are likely to be even more skewed to make it look more popular due to the hardware failures.  I'm on my 3rd 360, that counts as 3 sales.  I don't know a single person still on their original XB360, some got them replaced under warranty, others bought new ones.  Again, if this is a common theme you can near enough cut the 360 sales figure in half as half of them are replacements.

Somewhere along the line the numbers just don't add up.  My friendship groups are anything from about 18 to 40, who aren't afraid to spend money on gaming related equipment and games and the 360 is the primary choice.  I'm actually left wondering just where all the PS3s ended up, it's only the PS3 figures that don't make sense!  Relative to the 360 figures, the Wii figures are logical, although most of them end up locked away in cupboards because the novelty wears off quickly, and people start to realise that Nintendo are trying to squeeze cash out of people for extra accessories to play a handful of games at most, and the majority of the 3rd party games are incredibly poor.  About half the people I know with Wiis now pirate the games as the crack process is very easy and there is no real penalty for doing so (with the XB360 you risk your XBL account which is tied to personal data if you play online etc.)  Of course, with the massive install base, and single most identifiable gaming mascot Nintendo can still ship a lot of games, and they make a profit on all their hardware and accessories anyway, so have less reason to care; that's what you get if you sell last gen stuff as current gen..  It's more a concern for 3rd party developers and smaller studios.  The Wii also has a more naive userbase in general due to being marketted primarily as a family console; a lot of people who own it probably think cracking it involves dropping it on the floor.  I still feel that despite the stats, Sony don't have these advantages.

Now, it's obvious that in Japan there are utterly poor 360 sales but in Europe and North America the PS3 has done fairly well, it has particularly had a huge comeback with the PS3 Slim release.  The thing is holding it's own now.

You also neglected one of the 360's unique features; a readily available VGA RGBHV output cable.

I've never used it, I can't comment on it.  The Japan market is odd and seems more driven by political motivations than quality of products

As for the slim stands a good job of swinging the tide a bit towards Sony, it's just a shame they've had to some of the interesting features to get it there (ps2 compatibility, other os support..)  The cynical side of me would say the first one was not only to reduce costs, but also so that they can sell PS2 games directly; the God of War collection is pretty cool, but with HW backwards compatibiltiy I could have just picked up the original 2 games for cheaper.

The dropping of the Other OS feature makes me think Sony noticed a lot of units weren't being sold for gaming at all, and thus were being sold at a loss with no chance of making any money out of them.  There could be more to that story, it could even be an anti-emulation move, as all the other consoles have classic games in their online stores, if somebody was putting pressure on Sony I wouldn't rule it out (Sony have NEVER liked emulation, you've only got to look at Bleem/VGS cases to see this although in this case none of their hardware was being emulated but I imagine they would still fold easily in such a case).  I think any such concerns would be misguided as the whole Linux on PS3 thing requires too much messing about if you want to use the system in a normal way as well but their official reasoning that it wasn't really used that much / wasn't a primary feature doesn't really hold water when you consider it's nothing but a software switch in the firmware to enable it and costs them nothing.

[ark_ader]

I have both and I must admit that the PS3 is going to get sold, due to lack of use.

The Xbox 360 is fair to play on, as I do not have to upgrade my PC hardware to just play games.  The console is 99 pounds in the UK, which is more expensive than what I got mine for as my purchase included 4 games and an extra controller for a bit more.

That said I devote more time to my original Xbox now then ever before, so I think it is depending on what a user owns and what time is dedicated to that platform.  I have 40 PSP retail games I haven't played with, not to mention several 360 games still shrink wrapped as Fable 2 is getting played a lot.

I bought Fable 2 for 10 pounds new for the 360 and I have been playing that for 2 months.  I consider that money well spent, and probably why the PS3 is neglected.  I'm sure I will purchase more but I do tend to buy 2nd hand games, and they are cheaper for the 360 than the PS3.

If you take the time to play the system and the game to its conclusion you should not have any time left to hack.  I blame the internet and how easy it is to get copyrighted works so easily.  I do not believe it is teaching our youth any valuable lessons or morals.

On the other hand the PS3 is still 240 pounds (sterling) with no games.  So a family on a budget the option is obvious.

[Haze]

I have both and I must admit that the PS3 is going to get sold, due to lack of use.

The Xbox 360 is fair to play on, as I do not have to upgrade my PC hardware to just play games.  The console is 99 pounds in the UK, which is more expensive than what I got mine for as my purchase included 4 games and an extra controller for a bit more.

That said I devote more time to my original Xbox now then ever before, so I think it is depending on what a user owns and what time is dedicated to that platform.  I have 40 PSP retail games I haven't played with, not to mention several 360 games still shrink wrapped as Fable 2 is getting played a lot.

I bought Fable 2 for 10 pounds new for the 360 and I have been playing that for 2 months.  I consider that money well spent, and probably why the PS3 is neglected.  I'm sure I will purchase more but I do tend to buy 2nd hand games, and they are cheaper for the 360 than the PS3.

I buy a mix, although if Sony do go through with their plans for one-time registrations for games (and having to pay £20 to re-register on a different system) then I'll be boycotting said games completely the one-time DLC is annoying enough, and I've made a mental note of companies where I'm less likely to buy their games due to it (EA mainly).  The platinum titles are only £15 new tho, and you can pick them up for <£10 2nd hand, so there isn't a huge gulf in the cost of used games.

It's amazing that companies don't notice that they're also pissing off the legitimate customer with such schemes.  I'm sure they'll end up losing more in reputation and new sales than they would through 2nd hand ones anyway.

[shmokes]

Is using statistics and sales figures which seem to bare little resemblance of what I'm actually seeing somehow more professional and more scientific

Almost certainly.

With that said, according to NPD data as of September 2009 the Xbox 360 had a tie ratio of 8.8 games sold per console compared to the PS3's 6.8 games sold per console.  I wasn't able to find numbers specific to the UK, but I have little reason to think that UK 360/PS3 owners behave substnatially differently than owners of those consoles from other countries.  The 360 does seem to sell more software per console sold, but it doesn't seem like it is happening at anything like the rate you suggest.

[DJ_Izumi]

You can't argue that the PS3 software base isn't smaller.  It clearly is, but the PS3 sold like 6 million units or something like that in Q4 2009.  It was a huge catching up and it'd obviously take time for developers to catch up to the attractive new and larger install base.

And yes Haze, you are one single person, your experiences can't possibly represent the whole.  You're most likely just a statistical fluke. 

Though there is one point that is key.  When you considder how few exclusives there are between the 360 and PS3, owning one of each seems somewhat redundant unless you REALLY need those exclusives for each.  Best to find which one has what you want and get that.

[Haze]

You can't argue that the PS3 software base isn't smaller.  It clearly is, but the PS3 sold like 6 million units or something like that in Q4 2009.  It was a huge catching up and it'd obviously take time for developers to catch up to the attractive new and larger install base.

And yes Haze, you are one single person, your experiences can't possibly represent the whole.  You're most likely just a statistical fluke. 

Possibly, but I know a lot of people, and statistics can very, very easily be misrepresented or not tell the entire story.  Personally I find people that rely entirely on statistics and ratings to be less professional than those who also take into account other factors.  You can't make a good conclusion with only half the story, life isn't a machine.

[HaRuMaN]

life isn't a machine.

Yeah, but the PS3 is.

[DJ_Izumi]

Yeah, but the PS3 is.

It's also sold using a machine that records how many units it sold so it can notify people when to restock, and so statistics about what locations are selling how many can be used to direct future sales and development. 

[Haze]

Yeah, but the PS3 is.

It's also sold using a machine that records how many units it sold so it can notify people when to restock, and so statistics about what locations are selling how many can be used to direct future sales and development.  

That doesn't determine what people do with them tho..  As I said, I know more which have been purchased for research than have been purchased for playing.  Sales numbers don't tell you a damn thing in that case, nor about how many 360s have been bought to replace ones that failed.  AFAIK if you go with Amazon sales ranks it becomes even more skewed as they include 2nd hand sales (which the original manufacturers see as the same thing as piracy anyway these days)

Statistics give you some raw numbers, Human behavior can have a significant impact beyond that.  Industry likes to manipulate statistics, see all the 'lost due to piracy' stats...  Factor actual human behavior into that, and their stats are out by several magnitudes.

[Malenko]

When you considder how few exclusives there are between the 360 and PS3, owning one of each seems somewhat redundant unless you REALLY need those exclusives for each.  Best to find which one has what you want and get that.

I disagree but I respect your candor. There are plenty of(READ:tons) exclusives for each (exclusives, not good exclusives) and if your a gamer you'd want both. I got my PS3 primarily as a bluray player and I use it mostly for that. I did pick up the God Of War collection (I never played the PS2 versions, just the PSP one) and I admit, its a blast, and I look forward to GoW3,but Little Big Planet sucks. If I only had a PS3 I couldntplay Forza 2 & 3 , Gears of War,  I couldnt play Fable 2, I couldnt play a lot of other games too. If I only had a PS3 I couldnt play God Of War 3, the Ratchet and Clanks (best series ever!), uncharted series,etc,etc  so to say its redundant to have both is a very short sighted statement. If you bought a PS3 to play PS1, that'd be redundant.

[DJ_Izumi]

That doesn't determine what people do with them tho..  As I said, I know more which have been purchased for research than have been purchased for playing.  Sales numbers don't tell you a damn thing in that case, nor about how many 360s have been bought to replace ones that failed.  AFAIK if you go with Amazon sales ranks it becomes even more skewed as they include 2nd hand sales (which the original manufacturers see as the same thing as piracy anyway these days)

Statistics give you some raw numbers, Human behavior can have a significant impact beyond that.  Industry likes to manipulate statistics, see all the 'lost due to piracy' stats...  Factor actual human behavior into that, and their stats are out by several magnitudes.

When your own generated statistics puts 360 vs PS3 sales at 8:1 or higher, which is entirely not in tune with the sales of your country of 3:2 I'm going to chock that up to the extremely limited scope of the experience of one human being.  This is a simple application of Occam's razor.

Also with you saying you know more people who have bought them for 'research' then as video games, I think this underlines that your perspective is unique and very much not in tune with the experiences of the common consumer.

[Haze]

Jeez, fanboys, it's not like we're kids and stuck with the systems our parents bought us.

Buy what you like, why does it need to be justified in terms of sales figures...?

It's not a fanboy thread, or at least my posts aren't meant to be.  I'm trying to say that I think piracy would hurt the PS3 more than it does the 360 because it's already considered the 'runner-up' to many games developers, who currently only have the guaranteed sales (due to 0 piracy rate) as a primary reason to put some effort into their multi-platform games (but evidently not as much even now because many of the multi-platform PS3 ports are lazy)  Take this reason away, and developers are more likely to abandon drop the platform or produce even worse ports if they don't think the development time and costs can be justified by the additional income.  Basic economics.

I'm also saying that if Sony do push forward in their attempts to kill the 2nd hand market using activation codes then my stance will completely change, and I'll think that their platform does deserve to be cracked.  The one-time downloadable exclusive release-day content some manufacturers like EA like to push is already crossing the line of what I consider acceptable.  PC games crossed this line a long time ago, and are only getting worse, whcih is why I don't buy them, or even bother upgrading my PC for them anymore.

As a legitimate customer, be it of new games, or 2nd hand games, I don't like to be treated like a criminal, nor have the product I've paid for devalued by stupid gimmicks such as one-time DLC, or activation codes and if the industry wants to push in this direction I stop being a legitimate customer, and stop having any sympathy for their fate.  I'm sure I'm not alone in the feeling of resentment these gimmicks cause.  By all means reward me for buying a new copy with a special edition, with books containing background story, bonus CDs / USB sticks of the game soundtrack, t-shirts and other things which actually make me feel rewarded for being a new customer, I'll happily pay as I do for many CDs etc, but features which devalue my product if I want to sell it, or use it again on a new system years into the future don't feel like a reward, merely a punishment for being stupid enough to buy the product, so forget about it.  You're not adding value, you're decreasing it, there's a big difference.

Right now Sony are offering a rather expensive system, but as far as games are concerned they have some good titles, at reasonable prices, especially if you look at their Platinum range and the used games market.  Things are fair and balanced, the system is slowly maturing, and there is little reason to actually bother cracking the system.

[Haze]

Oh I fully expect Sony to go ahead with their plans.  Game companies have been trying forever to get rid of used game sales in Japan and this will certainly do it (remember all those "do not resell until X/X/XX" stickers on japanese games in the 90s?)

Those 'platinum hits' collections and such were another effort to kill off used games.

I think they're probably a lot more damaging to the bottom line than piracy, too.  

but as a customer the platinum hits collections give me what I want at a reasonable price, and the used market survives selling them even cheaper.  That actually makes sense, a basic product (no fancy extras) at a basic price if I don't care about getting it when it's brand new, and also a good chance to pick up the entire back catalogue of exclusives in new condition when buying the system a few years into it's life.  It's all these other braindead ideas that really don't.  Sometimes simplicity and giving the customer what they actually want (shockingly!) really is the best answer.

[Malenko]

What I dont get about the industry , if they are going to be so balls out about stopping used game sales, why are there so many Gamestop exclusive end user contect bonuses? like specials guns, levels, cars etc just for the EB version of a game. Im not speaking of just one off DLC codes, but things like the Red Incredible Hulk that are embedded into the disc.


Also, I believe the option to pirate helps hardware sales not decreases them.


Also, I dont believe one off DLC codes will help the industry at all. For me gaming is a hobby, if I cant buy a used copy of a game and play online; I just wont buy it; not used and not at all.

[Haze]

Probably the same reason some movies come out as Blockbuster exclusives even though they have policies about allowable content - someone did an analysis and determined they'll make more money that way.

It's even worse with CDs tho, where they have different exclusive bonus tracks for different stores and regions.

The newest Smashing Pumpkins album was a prime example of this, I didn't buy it because there were about 4-5 different versions, all with different bonus tracks.

To me something like an album is an artistic statement, by offering so many different versions of it they degrade it's integrity by trying to force a choice.  How did the artist WANT the album to sound, what track order did they want?  I don't mind a few extra acoustic bonus tracks tacked on the end of a single Japanese / Deluxe edition (or a CD full of extra tracks which clearly ARE bonus tracks), but when you have 5 versions and the 'bonus' tracks include things such as the title track to the album and there is no 'best' original version of the product then the product loses all legitimacy and the pirated version which has *all* the tracks becomes the definitive version.

I own all their other albums, even some singles and a box set, but the record company are having a laugh if they think I'm going to go out and buy an album which has so many different versions.  The 'best buy and itunes exclusive' stuff is just a dumb marketing ploy that again rips the customer off and fails to give them what they really want for no good reason.  The net result, they've lost at least one sale and I can't even see what they were hoping for, that I'd buy all 5?

[DJ_Izumi]

Jeez, fanboys, it's not like we're kids and stuck with the systems our parents bought us.

Buy what you like, why does it need to be justified in terms of sales figures...?

Actually I'm a 360 owner, I just acknowledge that the PS3 is holding it's own and made a huge comeback with the slim in the Christmas season this year.

My two main reasons for getting a 360 was Arcade units went $80 off that week at Best Buy and cause I could hook it up to my CRT monitor like this.   http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh100/AshleyAshes2/updateddesk.jpg

[Blanka]

I just ant to play PS2 games on my PS3 like we were originally promised.

Actually it was possible at one point. The first and second played PS2 games. The first through hardware, the second in software. Also SACD was played by the first two generations.

[DJ_Izumi]

Actually it was possible at one point. The first and second played PS2 games. The first through hardware, the second in software. Also SACD was played by the first two generations.

The second models wern't truely softaware emulators.  If it were there'd be no reason to not have CURRENT units emulate by software.  Those units featured a PS2 graphics processor and some other chips but emulated the rest of the PS2 in software.  It was a hybrid solution essentially.  ...That chip was also what was used to play SACDs and I admit I don't get why THAT couldn't be done in software. o.O

[Hoagie_one]

If I had to guess, the only reason we dont see PS2 emulation is that Sony plans on reselling those games via PSN at a future date.

[ark_ader]

If I had to guess, the only reason we dont see PS2 emulation is that Sony plans on reselling those games via PSN at a future date.

I figure that the PS2 will continue to be supported.

The PS2 consoles are still being sold, and even though the PSP is a souped up PS2, I do not think that Sony port to the PSP.

[Haze]

If I had to guess, the only reason we dont see PS2 emulation is that Sony plans on reselling those games via PSN at a future date.

I figure that the PS2 will continue to be supported.

The PS2 consoles are still being sold, and even though the PSP is a souped up PS2, I do not think that Sony port to the PSP.

Yeah they're still putting some games out for the PS2 even now, even exclusives I believe.  It's almost entirely opposite to Microsoft's strategy, whereby once the 360 was out your original Xbox was considered a dinosaur.

Anyway, as I said earlier, without hardware support PS2 emulation is difficult, even the 2nd generation of PS3s with the hybrid support had far more limited compatibility.  Sony will probably pick and choose some games to do some HLE based emulation, or porting for and release them as multi-game disc collectios (like the God of War collection), or more likely on PSN.  Microsoft have a surprisingly honest and refreshing approach to theri backwards compatibility by letting you use the original discs once their emulator supports the games rather than forcing you to rebuy the games, and I applaud them for that.  (although you've only got to look at the compatibility list notes on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_games_compatible_with_Xbox_360 and see that even with HLE techniques, and per-game tailoring this approach gives varied results, it's simply impossible to do a plug-and-play solution for emulating such an advanced system in software on current gen machines without HW support)

(In many cases it simply can't work, eg they couldn't do it with Dreamcast games due to the GD-ROM media, but I see no excuse for companies charging for games again when the original media can be used, even if it does take work to produce the emulator and tweak it for each game the costs aren't comparable to the original development costs at all)