• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

PlayStation It's amazing how insanely good the PlayStation 3 got at the end of its generation compared to the beginning

M

MagiCarbo

Bob-omb
The PlayStation 3 had a notoriously difficult first few years.

  • Its innovative, but insanely complex and hard to learn Cell processor made it very difficult to develop for.
  • Had mediocre third party support which led to games being Xbox 360/PC exclusive, or releasing on PS3 late/considerably worse
  • Had an embarrassingly lackluster online platform considering its hype, lacking the features and polish of Xbox Live
  • Was $599 US dollars!
  • Had bizarre, and confusing marketing that didn't make it clear what the hell it even was
  • Suffered constant software droughts due to first party delays and ho-hum third party support
  • Had superfluous SIXAXIS controller gimmicks shoved into seemingly every game
  • Said controller didn't even have rumble at launch
  • Was getting its ass handed to it in sales by the under-powered Wii

I think its well known that the PS3 from 2006-2008 was seen as kind of a joke, basically the Wii U or Sega Saturn of the Seventh Generation. But starting in 2009, something happened.

  • The console was gradually getting feature parity with Xbox, with online play even being free
  • Sony's improved development tools and support for PS3 devs lead to improved third party support, with games generally being much more comparable to 360, arriving day and date more frequently, and even having exclusive content
  • Sony's first party started to get aggressive with an endless stream of AAA and PSN titles that were light-years ahead of what Microsoft could develop (especially since they had just sold off Bungie)
  • DualShock 3 re-instated rumble
  • It had a far superior Motion Control platform with PlayStation Move compared to Kinect, that even lured a lot of Wii fans over to the system
  • Had crashed down in price to $299
  • Had a full on rebrand with an iconic ad-campaign and a new logo reminiscent of the PS2
  • Was an affordable, and kick ass Blu-Ray player and media deck
  • Had some of the exclusive greatest games of the generation with Uncharted trilogy, MGS4, Last of Us, Killzone 2 & 3, inFamous, Little Big Plannet, and more that finally showed what was possible on the hardware

While Microsoft still had an advantage with Xbox Live still being an overall better service (especially with the great PSN outage of 2011), it's safe to say that PlayStation 3 from 2009 to 2013 was just an overall better console that offered more value than both it or the Wii. Especially in 2011 where Microsoft was in full-on Kinect-mode with 360 and Nintendo seemed hell bent on keeping some of the Wii's best games away from America (Operation Rainfall anyone).
 
It helps that Sony was a company that could piss away millions of dollars trying to save it. More money was lost on it than Sega lost on the Dreamcast by multiple magnitudes and they lost all the profits they made from the PS1 and 2.

That said, I don't necessarily agree that the PS3 "won" the latter half of the gen. A lot of games still ran better on 360 and I feel the Wii still put out a lot of high quality exclusives in its later years. But overall that gen was a very bumpy era for all of the big 3 console manufacturers.
 
By the end of the 360/PS3 generation I wound up wishing I'd gone with a PS3 over a 360, much like by the end of the generation after I wound up wishing (besides Bloodborne) I'd gone with nothing instead of a PS4 lmao.

Really weird how from a value position their roles seemed reversed as time went on, as the amount of PC ports exclusive PS4 games got made me sort of regret having one. Whereas the PS3 still has a fair few exclusives I only got to play on a friend's system.
 
0
Don't really think most of the exclusives I've played from the PS3 hold up or would hold up if I revisited them, but there's no denying that by the end it felt like Sony was putting a lot more muscle behind the PS3 than Microsoft. I still think Microsoft might be the overall winner in terms of quality considering a lot of the third party offerings that gen ran better on 360 and were better than the exclusives being released, also a really good third party exclusive lineup originally with Mass Effect, Dead Rising and Tales of Vesperia (I also just generally think Halo and Gears at their peak were way better than Naughty Dog's efforts but I know that's an unpopular opinion). But that represents of course another problem - a lot of games were either only exclusive to the 360 for a limited time, or had their sequels release on the PS3 anyways.
 
Mekanos said:
That said, I don't necessarily agree that the PS3 "won" the latter half of the gen. A lot of games still ran better on 360
Click to expand...
True, but the performance gap for most games became much smaller than it was at the start of the gen, especially since the PS3 started getting everything the 360 got plus exclusive content and features for select titles, which gave people an actual reason to play on PS3, rather than playing out of pity. Though there were still a few exceptions like Bayonetta and Skyrim, it was a huge 180 from the start of the gen where the PS3 often got late shitty ports of games, or missed out on them entirely

Mekanos said:
I feel the Wii still put out a lot of high quality exclusives in its later years. But overall that gen was a very bumpy era for all of the big 3 console manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Yeah 2009 and 2010 were really good years for the Wii in that regard. But by 2011 a lot of its best games were ported to PS3 with Move support. Plus, Nintendo pretty much abandoning the Wii in the US in 2011 and 2012, as well as other devs dropping it after third party sales dried up left Wii gamers starved for content in those last two years,

Plus the Wii U's mediocre launch all drove Wii fans and casual gamers to PS3 instead, thus giving Sony an advantage going into PS4, which incorporated Move's tech into the DualShock 4, and repurposed the controllers for PSVR.
 
Last edited:
MagiCarbo said:
Plus the Wii U's mediocre launch all drove Wii fans and casual gamers to PS3 instead, thus giving Sony an advantage going into PS4, which incorporated Move's tech into the DualShock 4, and repurposed the controllers for PSVR.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Wii U's failure had any real effect on the PS3's audience. By 2012 most of the casual audience had moved on from the Wii, 2009 was the last year with really multiple big blue ocean titles. People who stuck around post-2010 were mostly core Nintendo fans I would wager.
 
Mekanos said:
I don't think the Wii U's failure had any real effect on the PS3's audience. By 2012 most of the casual audience had moved on from the Wii, 2009 was the last year with really multiple big blue ocean titles. People who stuck around post-2010 were mostly core Nintendo fans I would wager.
Click to expand...
Yup. It's hard to deny the rise of mobile gaming on smartphones providing an entry point for non-gamers. But for current casual and core gamers, A lot of them went to PS3 and especially 360 as well. 360 had Kinect, which while very much an all flash-no substance gimmick, undeniably breathed new life into the 360 for better or worse.

Meanwhile, PS3 had award-winning first party games, all the biggest HD third party games, could play Blu-Rays, music, had better online, and had a great Motion gaming platform with PS Move which, while not quite the Kinect-killer Sony had hoped it'd become, arguably helped bring a lot of more core Wii/Nintendo fans over to PlayStation (I should know, I was one of them).
 
0
Ps3 had ratchet, journey, LBP, GOW3, Ni no Kuni and thats all I needed. Free online was nice too. Doesn't hurt that by the time the GFC was over and I felt secure enough to buy luxuries the price was near parity anyway.
 
0
Yeah, despite the rough start (I remember all the shoddy ports, plus PSN being pretty mid compared to XBL), the PS3 saw an impressive comeback for the reasons you've outlined. For better or worse, whether you love or hate Sony's current direction, Uncharted 2 and The Last of Us in particular proved not only massively successful for the PS3, but hugely influential for the entire PlayStation brand as a whole. We're still seeing the ripples those games made.
 
Was it really that disliked to begin with? I remember people going nuts for Tools of Destruction, LittleBigPlanet and Folklore
 
Biggest deal of the back half of the PS3's life cycle for me was the return of the Tales series to western shores, Demon's Souls and a few of the more minor games. Can't say I care much, if at all, for the rest.
amara said:
The only thing missing for me was an all time Japan Studio game. They still had a decent run but nothing close to PS1/2/4
Click to expand...
Uh... Demon's Souls was a co-production with Japan Studio, but generally, yeah, I agree with that.
 
0
Aurc said:
Uncharted 2 and The Last of Us in particular proved not only massively successful for the PS3, but hugely influential for the entire PlayStation brand as a whole. We're still seeing the ripples those games made.
Click to expand...
Well, cinematic games were always PlayStation's aesthetic (Metal Gear Solid, FFVII, God of War, Crash and Spyro, Gran Turismo). But actually more important, Sony learned the importance of vertical hardware-software integration during the PS3 gen.

Before, Sony's consoles were developed in silos from game developers, which is part of the reason the PS3 was so difficult to develop for. But Shuhei Yoshida said that Kaz would only let him become Worldwide Studios president after Phil Harrison left under one condition. SCE WWS was to be integrated into PlayStation platform development. Sony essentially took a page out of Nintendo's playbook by letting its own first party studios actively participate in the creation of new hardware, which resulted in PS Move, PS Vita, PS4, PSVR, etc.

Ironically, Nintendo would repeat Sony's mistakes when making the Wii U by keeping most devs, including their own, in the dark during most of its development.
 
Last edited:
I think we all know what really saved the PS3

kevinbddp0.gif

KevinButlerReturns.gif
 
MagiCarbo said:
Well, cinematic games were always PlayStation's aesthetic (Metal Gear Solid, FFVII, God of War, Crash and Spyro, Gran Turismo). But actually more important, Sony learned the importance of vertical hardware-software integration during the PS3 gen.
Click to expand...
There is a big difference between those games and Uncharted or The Last of Us though. Though yes, ironically if you recursively track the history of influence in the gaming industry Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII probably did just as much if not more for influencing movie games than Uncharted or The Last of Us just by virtue of making the cinematic language so popular in gaming and doing it first. Sony's first party output also wasn't really predicated on being cinematic as much as looking cinematic either, until God of War or Uncharted give or take. So that's definitely more a PS3 thing.

Love it or hate it the PS3's biggest accomplishment was really getting Sony's act together from a first party perspective. They started that gen with their only huge IP from a sales perspective being Gran Turismo and the newly made God of War and ended it with Uncharted, The Last of Us, God of War, Little Big Planet and Gran Turismo (though LBP ended up being pretty mismanaged).
 
AngryAlchemist said:
There is a big difference between those games and Uncharted or The Last of Us though. Though yes, ironically if you recursively track the history of influence in the gaming industry Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII probably did just as much if not more for influencing movie games than Uncharted or The Last of Us just by virtue of making the cinematic language so popular in gaming and doing it first. Sony's first party output also wasn't really predicated on being cinematic as much as looking cinematic either, until God of War or Uncharted give or take. So that's definitely more a PS3 thing.
Click to expand...
Crash and Spyro were pretty cinematic for the time (Full Voice acting, Cutscenes, HUD-less gameplay, etc.) You also have the likes of Parappa the Rapper, Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, Sly Cooper, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Jet Li's Rise to Honor, Mark of Kri, Primal, and others that all laid the foundation for Sony's first party today.

It's not really just "cinematic", but PlayStation's brand was built on merging gaming and multi-media together even all the way back during the PS1 days.

AngryAlchemist said:
Love it or hate it the PS3's biggest accomplishment was really getting Sony's act together from a first party perspective. They started that gen with their only huge IP from a sales perspective being Gran Turismo and the newly made God of War and ended it with Uncharted, The Last of Us, God of War, Little Big Planet and Gran Turismo (though LBP ended up being pretty mismanaged).
Click to expand...
Sony was always pretty competitive with Nintendo in terms of first party (though more from a critical perspective than commercial), many of the PS2's best games were from Sony themselves, such as the ones I listed. But it was really the PS3 that forced them to make first party development their No. 1 priority, rather than the icing on the cake like before, especially given the console's initially poor third party support.
 
MagiCarbo said:
Crash and Spyro were pretty cinematic for the time (Full Voice acting, Cutscenes, HUD-less gameplay, etc.) You also have the likes of Parappa the Rapper, Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, Sly Cooper, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Jet Li's Rise to Honor, Mark of Kri, Primal, and others that all laid the foundation for Sony's first party today.
Click to expand...
This would get too quickly semantical so I will skip that

MagiCarbo said:
Sony was always pretty competitive with Nintendo in terms of first party (though more from a critical perspective than commercial),
Click to expand...
I mean, considering I literally said "sales perspective", I'd say that was pretty definitely not true.
 
0
I remember when some of the Conker devs did a really short let’s play of Conkers Bad Fur Day many years ago. One of them quipped that it’s always a shame that once the twilight years kick in for a system you have to move onto the next one. Since by that point you’ll be familiar enough with it to really do some tricks with it.

It’s true for every gen but seeing what the PS3 was putting out towards the middle and end made it ring true to me.
 
0
I get the OP point of view, but I slighlty disagree
Under a consumer point of view let's say that the starting point was so bad, that a big company like Sony with the chance to waste all those money had many points to be basically easily addressed during a 7+ years generational span

so, I've been more surprised/disappointed in how the completely abandoned the Vita, than by how they were able to gain back some/a lot of brand awereness with the PS3

I also think that the end-gen properly managed by them + how badly MS managed on the contrary the One initial presentation and concept has been an almost deadly combo for Xbox lol
 
0
MagiCarbo said:
True, but the performance gap for most games became much smaller than it was at the start of the gen, especially since the PS3 started getting everything the 360 got plus exclusive content and features for select titles, which gave people an actual reason to play on PS3, rather than playing out of pity. Though there were still a few exceptions like Bayonetta and Skyrim, it was a huge 180 from the start of the gen where the PS3 often got late shitty ports of games, or missed out on them entirely


Yeah 2009 and 2010 were really good years for the Wii in that regard. But by 2011 a lot of its best games were ported to PS3 with Move support. Plus, Nintendo pretty much abandoning the Wii in the US in 2011 and 2012, as well as other devs dropping it after third party sales dried up left Wii gamers starved for content in those last two years,

Plus the Wii U's mediocre launch all drove Wii fans and casual gamers to PS3 instead, thus giving Sony an advantage going into PS4, which incorporated Move's tech into the DualShock 4, and repurposed the controllers for PSVR.
Click to expand...
I think the WiiUs mediocre launch had Nintendo’s casual audience rally around the 3DS (that was now finding its feet) rather than the PS3 to be honest. You can’t really leave out portables where Nintendo fans are concerned as the fanbase isn’t primarily home console based unlike Sony/Xbox, and thus isn’t 1-1 comparable on platform choice as just a home console market. Particularly as at this point the 3DS was getting the OOT remake, MK7, Mario 3D Land etc.

At the same point Vita and PS4 were about to launch, so there was a lot more going on than just Wii-WiiU and the twilight years of the PS3. The Nintendo audience rallied hard around the 3DS as that’s what Nintendo had to do too as an emergency measure, leaving the WiiU on minimal support as they couldn’t afford to revitalise two platforms and one was far easier to push into a success.

At the time, I picked up a Wii and a PS3, alongside my DS and PSP, and while I played the portables more as that’s where all my favourite rpgs were, I still found plenty of good ones to play on the home consoles. The Wii in particular had MH Tri and Fire Emblem RD, while on PS3 I went for Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Dragon’s Dogma and Skyrim. I think that’s all like 2009-2011 (forgive me if I’m wrong, it’s been a while!). Out of the two home consoles, the Wii faded first (Skyward Sword felt like the last hurrah but I liked Xenoblade and The Last Story too), but I think 2011 was probably the last PS3 game I played too (shooters don’t do much for me). As after that I remember I just picked up a 3DS as it was finally taking off. The Vita came out shortly after, and the home consoles just didn’t interest me after that. The Vita struggled as Sony poured its support into PS4 and none of its main dev teams wanted to work on anything else, and while I dabbled with a WiiU for a few months, it didn’t really interest me too much as it felt massively compromised (but as a stepping stone to the Switch). Which left me with pretty much just a 3DS. Which was handy as Capcom and Atlus went ballistic on it.

Anyway, in short, I find it hard to remember 2010-2011 as ‘Wii fading, PS3 still going strong’ and ‘2012 WiiU launch fails, PS4 succeeds’ without also adding in ‘the 3DS finally takes off in late 2011 with multiple Nintendo major first party games after stumbling out of the gate in early 2011.’ I don’t know, 3DS just felt like a combination of the DS and the Wii as Nintendo almost abandoned a struggling WiiU to rally behind the platform where their audience held out. All of which leads to the Switch and the Wii, WiiU, DS and 3DS all contributing to its blueprint, it’s hard to remove the portable market in order to look at just the home console side of Nintendo’s business and customer base.
 
Last edited:
0
neil said:
I’d like to see some evidence of that. How many games even supported it?
Click to expand...
While Move unfortunately never had a true killer app, it had some decent support. Shooters like Killzone 3 and Resistance 3 brought Wii-like pointer controls to PS3 gamers, which allowed for more precise aiming. A lot of Wii games were ported over like the rail shooters, the Wii version of Okami, and No More Heroes. There were a bunch of cool gems that supported it like Tumble, Child of Eden, Sorcery, etc.

Like I said, it wasn't the massive Kinect killer Sony had hoped it become, but I think it succeeded in being the cooler, more sophisticated Wii alternative for the more core gamer, selling over 15 million units worldwide, which isn't too bad for a PS3 add-on. Granted, I'm saying that from a personal perspective as well since Move was what got me to finally get a PS3 in 2010. Plus, Move, combined with Sony's push for 3D at the time, both formed the basis for the development of PSVR, which many would agree is what Move was really made for.
 
Last edited:
MagiCarbo said:
While Move unfortunately never had a true killer app, it had some decent support. Shooters like Killzone 3 and Resistance 3 brought Wii-like pointer controls to PS3 gamers, which allowed for more precise aiming. A lot of Wii games were ported over like the rail shooters, the Wii version of Okami, and No More Heroes. There were a bunch of cool gems that supported it like Tumble, Child of Eden, Sorcery, etc.

Like I said, it wasn't the massive Kinect killer Sony had hoped it become, but I think it succeeded in being the cooler, more sophisticated Wii alternative for the more core gamer, selling over 15 million units worldwide, which isn't too bad for a PS3 add-on. Granted, I'm saying that from a personal perspective as well since Move was what got me to finally get a PS3 in 2010. Plus, Move, combined with Sony's push for 3D at the time, both formed the basis for the development of PSVR, which many would agree is what Move was really made for.
Click to expand...
I remember being impressed by Move but I never got one, even though I had a PS3 late in the gen. I think I agree there was no killer app.
 
neil said:
I remember being impressed by Move but I never got one, even though I had a PS3 late in the gen. I think I agree there was no killer app.
Click to expand...
I also think that Kinect simply had broader appeal to non-gamers with its controller-free concept, while many just looked at Move as just this silly looking Wii Remote knock-off. Plus, Move required a ton of calibration and set-up before you could use it, so it wasn't as easy to pick up and play as something like a Wii Remote.

But again, it wasn't a complete failure either. It sold to roughly one third of the PS3's userbase, had some decent games, and its DNA lives on through PSVR and PSVR 2. A stark contrast to Kinect where Microsoft washed their hands of it completely after everybody got sick of it.
 
Last edited:
I can't recall it getting any good. It just had great games from third parties during 2010 to 2013 and some exclusive overhyped QTE plagued walking simulators. God, I hate that console. A testament to bad design and corpo arrogance saved by fans of PlayStation finally able to afford one.
 
0
I jumped on the PS3 train in 2010 and it really felt like I was treated to some terrific games on a very regular basis. Thinking about exclusives only, I had a great time with all of the below titles.

Bigger budget titles: The Last of Us, LBP2, Motorstorm Apocalypse, Uncharted 3, Modnation Racers
Japan Studios and smaller titles - Tokyo Jungle, Puppeteer, Sports Champions 2, Journey
HD Collections - Ico/SOTC, Sly, Jak and Daxter

Comparatively, there weren't a huge amount of exclusives from before then that really interested me all that much. A few for sure (the first Motorstorm, LBP, Uncharted 2) but 3 titles in 4 years compared to at least 9 new ones over the next 4 is a wide gulf.
 
0
I 100% agree and it was a completely shame for Sony to slam all that progress right into a brick wall and start all over on the PS4.

PS3 is my favorite Sony console ever.
 
0
Mekanos said:
I don't think the Wii U's failure had any real effect on the PS3's audience. By 2012 most of the casual audience had moved on from the Wii, 2009 was the last year with really multiple big blue ocean titles. People who stuck around post-2010 were mostly core Nintendo fans I would wager.
Click to expand...

It was also a lot of kids. When I talk to people who are nostalgic for late era Wii games or played MKWii and Brawl for years after they came out, it's mostly people college aged, who would have been like 6-12 in 2011.
 
0
It is a minor miracle that Sony was able to turn it around. The PS3 is still my favorite first party lineup from Sony.

GigaUltraMoon said:
Was it really that disliked to begin with? I remember people going nuts for Tools of Destruction, LittleBigPlanet and Folklore
Click to expand...

The PS3 had a really really bad start. From $599 to a terrible online infrastructure and a severe game drought the first couple of years, it was not a good start by any means.
 
maniacmaison said:
What's this? I watched a couple of videos of Kinect but couldn't find it lol
Click to expand...
I just google searched the GIF, but I believe this was Kinect's big reveal/demo at E3. I could be totally wrong, so someone please correct me if need be. This one just always stood out to me because it was so horribly executed.
 
0
Josh5890 said:
The PS3 had a really really bad start. From $599 to a terrible online infrastructure and a severe game drought the first couple of years, it was not a good start by any means.
Click to expand...

I still remember you couldn't even do party or private chats for a good while and you had to go back to XMB even to do basic shit like answer messages. Let's not even talk about the PStore v1.0 lmao

Line up wise it was...ok. I liked Resistance and Motorstorm well enough but there really was no contest compared to what Microsoft was offering at the time.
 
AngryNopon said:
I still remember you couldn't even do party or private chats for a good while and you had to go back to XMB even to do basic shit like answer messages. Let's not even talk about the PStore v1.0 lmao

Line up wise it was...ok. I liked Resistance and Motorstorm well enough but there really was no contest compared to what Microsoft was offering at the time.
Click to expand...

As much as I loved the set up with the XMB, the whole OS set up was crap. That is what happens when you ship a console with 256mb of RAM. Even for 2006 that was ridiculously low.
 
0
neil said:
The Kinect to me was almost a scam product with how much MS overhyped and oversold what it could do. It was a disgrace imho.
Click to expand...
Thing is, Kinect worked. It was just too slow and impractical for most gaming applications. Even when I was 13, I didn't really see how you could do any serious gaming with it compared to PS Move or a Wiimote. And yeah, it was definitely nowhere near as magical as Microsoft hyped it up as, Lol.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. The PS3 is my favorite Playstation console. It had a rough start but by the end there were a ridiculous amount of good games after devs finally figured out the cell. I've owned all Nintnedo and Playstation systems since the NES and the PS3 is the console I have the most games for.
 
0
I basically skipped the whole PS3 generation (also skipped PS2 entirely) until the very end when TLOU came out. It was basically just a TLOU box for me.

But yeah, that it started pretty rough. They have their issues now like any of the big 3 but I'm glad they learned not to repeat those mistakes.
 
0
Sony and Microsoft were complete opposites that gen for me - 360 was awesome first half, sucked in the last part, PS3 was rubbish at the start and ended up being really good at the end.

PSP was where it was at for me with my main Sony gaming system during that time anyway.
 
0
robertman2 said:
Microsoft basically ceasing to make anything core outside of Halo/Forza/Gears after 2010 in favor of Kinect helped a lot too
Click to expand...
I mean 2009 was where 360 started to run out of steam, and then the following year was the dark age of Xbox being a Kinect/Halo/Forza/Gears factory, while Sony showed an actual consistent stream of innovative games.
 
I got a PS3 after the first price drop to $500. I played a lot of the early stuff on it, games like Killzone 2, Motorstorm, and the first Littlebigplanet. I fell off of gaming pretty hard not too long after that, so I didn’t get to experience the PS3 renaissance. I remember being pretty hyped for Modnation Racers though.
 
0
neil said:
You’re not really convincing me that it worked with this description…
Click to expand...
It's generally agreed that it works great for party games where you don't need the precision or versatility of a controller. But anything else it was pretty much useless.
 
0
MagiCarbo said:
Had mediocre third party support which led to games being Xbox 360/PC exclusive

Suffered constant software droughts due to first party delays and ho-hum third party support
Click to expand...

These are not really true. It got so many games its sales actually didn't deserve and got most major third party support. The classic example was how COD3 sold more on Wii than PS3, but COD4 was then released on PS3 but not Wii. And PS3 got essentially everything Japanese.

MagiCarbo said:
  • It had a far superior Motion Control platform with PlayStation Move compared to Kinect, that even lured a lot of Wii fans over to the system
Click to expand...
What do you have to back this up? Kinect was vastly more successful.

And Move was an expensive, awkward and overall worse obvious knockoff of the Wii remote +nunchuck, swapping the camera and sensor positions requiring the controller to look like a dildo. The only reason any Wii fans would use it was because they had learned the value of pointer/IR aiming and PS3 was the only place you could play the likes of Resident Evil 5 with that.

MagiCarbo said:
  • Was an affordable, and kick ass Blu-Ray player and media deck
Click to expand...
This was true from the start, or at least in less than a year when the console was down to $400, it wasn't part of the later 'turnaround'

MagiCarbo said:
  • Had some of the exclusive greatest games of the generation with Uncharted trilogy, MGS4, Last of Us, Killzone 2 & 3, inFamous, Little Big Plannet, and more that finally showed what was possible on the hardware
Click to expand...
Killzone and infamous were not 'game of the generation' contenders. They were mediocre answers to more popular games.

What actually turned it around was Sony re-investing to the tune of billions in losses. I have little doubt they cut sweetheart deals to keep games on the platform, and yes they invested heavily in getting the hardware cost down, moneyhats and good first party games rolling in.

But the biggest thing was Microsoft/Sony essentially agreeing to a cold war of stringing the generation out to recoup some of their billions in losses, including a major relaunch with Kinect on Microsoft's part. Never before has a generation gone on so long without a new generation console jumping in. The Wii U was 6 years after the PS3/Wii and 7 years after the generated started with the 360. And of course the Wii U was a dud by a company stuck in a major transition, Sony and Microsoft waited 7/8 years for their own successors. Compare this to the 360/PS3 which were 4/6 years after the XB/PS2.
 
Last edited:
D.Lo said:
These are not really true. It got so many games its sales actually didn't deserve. The classic example was how COD3 sold more on Wii than PS3, but COD4 was then released on PS3 but not Wii.
Click to expand...
Probably because the PS3 was a direct competitor to the 360 as a next gen HD system, whereas the Wii served a completey different audience with it's less powerful hardware. (This was before Activision decided to bring the series to everything.) People forget, the Wii actually had pretty good third party support for it's first half for what it was as a console. It only faltered after sales for non-Nintendo games became too volatile. Meanwhile, it was pretty rare to see the PS3 in its early years get a game day and date with the 360, and if it did, it was often a gimped, under supported version thanks to Cell.

D.Lo said:
What do you have to back this up? Kinect was vastly more successful
Click to expand...
Kinect may have been more successful in the short term, but most agree it was a fad with very little substance. Move and it's tech however, were repurposed for the DualShock 4 and PSVR. Plus, conceptually, it was just better than Kinect because of its versatility.

D.Lo said:
And Move was an expensive, awkward and overall worse obvious knockoff of the Wii remote +nunchuck, swapping the camera and sensor positions requiring the controller to look like a dildo. The only reason any Wii fans would use it was because they had learned the value of pointer/IR aiming and PS3 was the only place you could play the likes of Resident Evil 5 with that.
Click to expand...
Move had far superior tech to the original Wiimote, and many who used it saw the potential. The only real problem was it's constant need for calibration.

D.Lo said:
Killzone and infamous were not 'game of the generation' contenders. They were mediocre answers to more popular games
Click to expand...
Whatever your opinion on that is, Sony's first party and exclusives were generally leagues ahead of what Microsoft was doing by that point, which was mostly Kinect shit and Halo/Gears.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom