Playstation Network Down

[Phynx]

Originally Posted by Velocity

Didn't I warn you all if this turned into a gaming flamewar on which is better?

Personally I hate both systems because they were hindered from their full potential because both company's refuse to think outside the box for gaming. I only think xbox is a better system because Microsoft actually kind of cares about its customers, I mean, they generate immense funds from their subscriptions whereas Sony doesn't hence they don't care as much.

[supermousie]

Originally Posted by Velocity

Didn't I warn you all if this turned into a gaming flamewar on which is better?

Uh, don't think you did.
It's not much of a flamewar anyway. CHILLAX BRAH!

[fido123]

Originally Posted by ChesterDalton

you pc elitists need to sit down and play a good console game.. I have a kick ass computer but I still prefer my consoles yes you get better precision with a mouse, but a well developped console shooter, you'd never have the feeling of missing a mouse after you gotten used to a controller as for consoles.. the ps3 is the worst.... worst graphics and besides, it's best games are all available on the xbox 360

I played consoles until I got my PC which was around when WaW came out. I haven't touched my consoles since, although it's understandable why people have consoles, it's all about preference. I was just being a dick.

Originally Posted by Phynx

Will you be pissed and finally admit defeat as the PS3 being inferior or will you still stand as a fanboy to Sony's continuing failure? They died after Playstation 2. Sorry.

Holy **** you're such a stupid fanboy it hurts. Besides for this network failure what makes the PS3 inferior? It has more powerful, and more reliable hardware (doesn't break every 2 months like my XBox did), has free on-line multiplayer while Microsoft charges you $15/mo for the same thing.

Originally Posted by Phynx

P.S. I will say one thing about the Xbox 360. While I feel it's fallen prey to problems(i.e. mass RROD's for everyone YAY!), it still has held out as solidly reliable console with untapped potential(cause Microsoft thinks to small).

How is it reliable? Everybody I know has had one break down at least two times. Also untapped potential? What untapped potential are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Phynx

Personally I hate both systems because they were hindered from their full potential because both company's refuse to think outside the box for gaming.

What are you talking about? Have you heard about the Playstation Move? Microsoft Kinect? That kinda seems like they're thinking outside the box or you're just to much of a dumbshit with technology to really understand anything about this subject considering you don't know how to install a printer driver.

Originally Posted by Phynx

I only think xbox is a better system because Microsoft actually kind of cares about its customers, I mean, they generate immense funds from their subscriptions whereas Sony doesn't hence they don't care as much.

Sony gets money from their customers too, I can guarantee you they both don't give half a **** unless you're paying them money. They just train they're phone people for customer service.


All your arguments seem are retarded please leave I can't even wrap my head around the stupidity coming out of your mouth.

[supermousie]

Originally Posted by fido123

Holy **** you're such a stupid fanboy it hurts.

Oh, sweet irony.

Originally Posted by fido123

How is it reliable? Everybody I know has had one break down at least two times.

Mine didn't, and hasn't- 1st revision "unreliable" 360 with apparently poor GPU cooling.

Originally Posted by fido123

What are you talking about? Have you heard about the Playstation Move? Microsoft Kinect? That kinda seems like they're thinking outside the box or you're just to much of a dumbshit with technology to really understand anything about this subject considering you don't know how to install a printer driver.

PlayStation Move+Kinect both were released long after the Wii, which was first to introduce the motion=play concept, which came as standard. So, in this case, Nintendo is thinking outside the box.

How can you assume Phynx is incapable of installing a printer driver?

Originally Posted by fido123

Sony gets money from their customers too, I can guarantee you they both don't give half a **** unless you're paying them money. They just train they're phone people for customer service.

Given the fact that 99.99% of all businesses in the world are focused on getting money, why shouldn't MS and Sony treat non-paying "customers" like dirt? It's the freebie hounds that are getting something for nothing.

And you can't even use the correct "their".

Originally Posted by fido123

All your arguments seem are retarded please leave I can't even wrap my head around the stupidity coming out of your mouth.

Erm, so what you're saying is that you're too stupid to figure out what Phynx is saying? 'Cause that's how it comes across.
Anyway, moar sweet irony.

tl;dr- fido123 is a butthurt asshat fanboy who can't maintain a solid argument or use the correct "their", and is now getting defensive that PSN is ****ed- in addition to the fact that Microsoft+Nintendo are currently on top.

[Velocity]

oh well, I haven't joined a console war in forever.

Originally Posted by fido123

has free on-line multiplayer while Microsoft charges you $15/mo for the same thing.

hmm, I pay 50$ a year which amounts to 4.1666666666666666666666666666667$ a month. I don't know where you buy your xbl, but i think you're getting overcharged. In the end, at least I know it'll work at the end of the day.



Also, everyone knows this generation sucked completely. Wii with it's incredibly bad game line-up, Microsoft with the early RROD problems which are pretty much cleaned up, and Sony with there sue happy SCEA and PSN problems.

[supermousie]

Originally Posted by Velocity

hmm, I pay 50$ a year which amounts to 4.1666666666666666666666666666667$ a month. But at least I know it'll work at the end of the day.

See, I can't get my point across without an obscenely long post and you did it in two fricken sentences.

edit: maybe fido is buying his XBL in one-month increments throughout the year... Which still only amounts to $119.88 instead of the $180.00 @ $15per month.

[MP3 player]

Supposevly we should get an update soon becuase itz been four days and our next update should be a timephrame ..

Soooo excited !!

[welsh_girl]

Originally Posted by Velocity

hmm, I pay 50$ a year which amounts to 4.1666666666666666666666666666667$ a month. I don't know where you buy your xbl, but i think you're getting overcharged. In the end, at least I know it'll work at the end of the day.

I think you're getting over charged for your peer-to-peer gaming. Which is free on PC and PS3.

[Gun92]

Unless something like what happened to the PSN happens. I love all of what I have quite equally. Play on all three and I really don't have much of a preference. Each one serves one purpose to me that the others can't.

[Velocity]

Originally Posted by welsh_girl

I think you're getting over charged for your peer-to-peer gaming. Which is free on PC and PS3.

True, but I do also play PC and PS3, it's just I enjoy console more then PC and PC more then PS3.

[ghost-]

Originally Posted by supermousie

some dumbshit comment

wow i remember when i attacked grammar

btw everybody this thread will go nowhere in the end, shut up. I can't wait for psn to be back up so i can play killzone 3!

[DJMAYYYNE]

Originally Posted by fido123

It has more powerful hardware

360 has the same-power processor, except the video memory of the 360 is higher, which is why games look better and resolutions can be set higher unlike the ps3 and the 360 has more ram than the ps3, making it run faster, loading screens are less than that of the ps3. So the argument that the ps3 is more powerful than the ps3 is invalid

Originally Posted by fido123

has free on-line multiplayer while Microsoft charges you $15/mo for the same thing.

XBL is more secure than PSN, a hacker penetrating XBL is less likely to happen than to PSN. Albeit, security may increase when PSN finishes their upgrades and comes back on, only time will tell...

[fido123]

Originally Posted by supermousie

Oh, sweet irony.

Please point out where I'm being a fanboy. If anything I'm just playing a bit of devils advocate. I'm a PC gamer but I completely understand why somebody wouldn't want to go down that route for a rather large number of reasons. Both the XBox and PS3 are good consoles, and IMO most of pull usually lies with exclusive game titles.

Originally Posted by supermousie

Mine didn't, and hasn't- 1st revision "unreliable" 360 with apparently poor GPU cooling.

I know different people who have different revisions and none of my close friends haven't had to send theirs in once, and I hardly know anybody who hasn't had to period. This isn't the case 100% of the time, but it's far to common to be acceptable in my opinion.

Originally Posted by supermousie

PlayStation Move+Kinect both were released long after the Wii, which was first to introduce the motion=play concept, which came as standard. So, in this case, Nintendo is thinking outside the box.

Nintendo pioneered it but Microsoft and Sony took it to new levels. I've only played with the PlayStation Move and the technology in it it completely different than what's in the Wii, and is capable of a lot more amazing things such as putting you on the screen where you're holding a sword instead of a controller.

Originally Posted by supermousie

How can you assume Phynx is incapable of installing a printer driver?

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...d.php?t=117550
Also an example of how much of a assclown he can be: http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...5&postcount=44

Originally Posted by supermousie

Given the fact that 99.99% of all businesses in the world are focused on getting money, why shouldn't MS and Sony treat non-paying "customers" like dirt? It's the freebie hounds that are getting something for nothing.

I'm not trying to say they should treat them like dirt, I'm just saying Microsoft is pretty shitty with their non-paying customers too.

Originally Posted by supermousie

And you can't even use the correct "their".

Nice detective work

Originally Posted by supermousie

Erm, so what you're saying is that you're too stupid to figure out what Phynx is saying? 'Cause that's how it comes across.

Well you're reading into it wrong ;D

Originally Posted by supermousie

tl;dr- fido123 is a butthurt asshat fanboy who can't maintain a solid argument or use the correct "their", and is now getting defensive that PSN is ****ed- in addition to the fact that Microsoft+Nintendo are currently on top.

Too bad I didn't say anything that would make somebody with half a ****ing mind say this. I was just pissed at Phynx's assclownery. I think Nintendo deserves to be on top, and think Xbox and PS3 are pretty equal consoles. I'm pretty neutral on the issue cause I'm a PC gamer, and I'm only sarcastically an elitist about it. I enjoy going over to my friend's house and playing Mortal Combat and other exclusives on their consoles.

Originally Posted by Velocity

hmm, I pay 50$ a year which amounts to 4.1666666666666666666666666666667$ a month. I don't know where you buy your xbl, but i think you're getting overcharged. In the end, at least I know it'll work at the end of the day.

I think I got WoW mixed up with XBL or I'm thinking of the monthly membership they offer.

Originally Posted by DJMAYYYNE

360 has the same-power processor, except the video memory of the 360 is higher, which is why games look better and resolutions can be set higher unlike the ps3 and the 360 has more ram than the ps3, making it run faster, loading screens are less than that of the ps3. So the argument that the ps3 is more powerful than the ps3 is invalid

http://gear.ign.com/articles/111/1116182p1.html

With regards to what you said, the processors run at the same frequency however have over two times the amount of cores. Your video card information is misleading because the video memory is shared with the RAM. RAM also doesn't make a game run faster, rather than just allowing for a game to store more information at any time. The RAM is also shared with the video memory, so in the end they both have equal amounts of RAM but I guess the XBox does have a bit more flexibility. IGN's article has come to the conclusion that the PS3 is better than the XBox 360 hardware wise, although the XBox does have it's places where it does beat out PS3 like the video card overall.

Originally Posted by DJMAYYYNE

]XBL is more secure than PSN, a hacker penetrating XBL is less likely to happen than to PSN. Albeit, security may increase when PSN finishes their upgrades and comes back on, only time will tell...

Agree'd

[DJMAYYYNE]

Yes, I was mistaken about the cpu and the ram. But for some reason, my 360 loads the same games faster than my ps3, usually by a couple of seconds, and it also runs better and has less lag than my ps3. I've compared them both and my conclusion is that the 360 is faster than the ps3

[fido123]

A lot of that has to do with the tricky architecture in the PS3, where many games that were compiled for PS3 could have been optimized better to take full advantage of it's hardware. Also a lot of it depends on the "internal pipeline depth" or "stages" a processor has to process a piece of data. Processors similar to AMDs can process a lot of data really fast but when given a bunch of smaller streams of data it lacks behind something similar to an Intel processor. In your case I'd say a lot of it depends on the game running on PS3s tricky architecture, and it might be video card differences again depending specifically on the game. There are a lot of factors.

[DJMAYYYNE]

Originally Posted by fido123

A lot of that has to do with the tricky architecture in the PS3, where many games that were compiled for PS3 could have been optimized better to take full advantage of it's hardware. Also a lot of it depends on the "internal pipeline depth" or "stages" a processor has to process a piece of data. Processors similar to AMDs can process a lot of data really fast but when given a bunch of smaller streams of data it lacks behind something similar to an Intel processor. In your case I'd say a lot of it depends on the game running on PS3s tricky architecture, and it might be video card differences again depending specifically on the game. There are a lot of factors.

I compared Black Ops, Mw2, and Super Street Fighter IV; they all run better on the 360 in my comparison. I compared the most commonly played games that run on both consoles, and the 360 plays them better.

[nuclearsamurai]

Okay, let's stray away from this oh-so-heated console debate for a while.

Y'know that system software update that's been mentioned in the blog several times? It's available as of... twenty minutes ago. Unfortunately, PSN still isn't back up yet, but at least *some* sort of progress is being made for this.

[fido123]

Then I'm kinda stumped. Maybe exclusive titles that were made to run and PS3's and only PS3's architecture may be the only games that reap the hardware's benefits most the time considering it's fairly tricky, but I don't really know. FFXIII seemed to run pretty well especially for something so intensive.

(Sorry ninja'd)

[customstuff]

Xboxes don't really die if you actually take care of them. I've had mine for nearly 3 years now (and to be honest, I still don't take care of it that well, ahaha)

My friend had an xbox for over 2 years. He was fed up when it broke so he bought a PS3 (because they totally never break trololol) and it broke in a week and a half.

He bought one of the new xboxes and only uses his PS3 for Netflix.

[DJMAYYYNE]

Yep, I saw it 15 mins. ago and I'm updating now