the "commercial" release is set for 2014. MS will have already released their next console by then. - Strike 1

If this technology can be used on DVDs, it can be used on Blu-ray -Strike 2

Why would MS's NEXT console compete with Sony's CURRENT console? - Strike 3

I'd say this article strikes out View

hmmm.......

what about using cutscenes to load the next level? View

If you wanted to sue, by all means..... but you would lose.

If you rewatch it, they never say "macs don't get viruses or crash"

What they do is say is basically "PCs get viruses and crash"

subtle difference there that gets their point across but which doesn't have false advertising. It's the same way businesses can say "under $100" then charge $99.99.

PS, I'm a mac, and it's sooooo much more reliable than my Windows based comps. View

yep, don't worry, you'll still get your platinum. You'll end with the platinum and something like 85% of the trophies completed (15% from the DLC)

if you need more info on this, check this link.
http://www.ps3trophies.org/... View

probably MS's patents View

For everyone (Riven, IaMS12) that didn't quiet "get" to what I was referring.

From the article. "A Gamertag, from the very start, has set out to feel like an identity, something that is tied into every Xbox 360 game they play, every Achievement they unlock, and every success they have in a multiplayer environment. It feels like something that is theirs."

In order to be a part of the multiplayer environment, you have to have a gold account. That means you are willing to pay for Xbox Live. Which means you are NATURALLY going to feel more connected to it. (you wouldn't buy something you weren't happy with, or that wasn't worth your money.) So naturally, you are going to feel more emotionally connected to your gamerscore than you would your trophies (which you don't have to pay for the multiplayer)

It's as simple as that. MS is very smart when it comes to this, because they not only make money, but they enable their users to feel like part of an exclusive "club" or community. They know that you will have emotional ties to what you pay for.

As for the "you don't have to pay" argument. I say true, but do you think the people that don't pay really care? Do you think they feel connected to their gamerscore? or do they feel like this writer describes the trophies?

Also, Dark General, you don't need to buy the DLC to get the platinum trophy. It will unlock, even if you have downloaded the DLC, as long as you finish the games trophies. View

The reason people feel more "connected" to their gamerscore is because they pay for it.

That's it, bottom line. You're always gonna feel more connected to something when you make a conscious decision to pay for it. View

It appears that this is not a Sony thing, but maybe a store thing. They comment that there is not word yet of a 360 version and there is a PS2 version.

Am I understanding that right, that Sony has nothing to do with this bundle? View

I hope Polamalu and Rothlesberger don't make it........

I don't want the curse hitting the steelers next year!

Put Ed Reed on the cover! lol View

it won't..... imo, you should sell now.

btw, HUZZZAAAAHHHHHH!!! View

YES!!!

Toby Keith!
I've been waiting sooo long for some more country on Rock Band View

I dislike pretty much EVERYTHING about R:2. The story is not as focused or as dire as FOM. The Graphics? Some of the colors seem completely off to me. Like I'm looking at the world through super-saturated glasses.

Where this game really loses it for me was the multiplayer.

Not only did I LOVE playing through FOM with someone that was sitting right next to me, the online competitive also was much more enjoyable. The boards are better, as well as the weapons and weapon spawn points. With FOM, I loved playing all the different competitive game-types. With R2, I can barely work up the strength to play team deathmatch (which I'm only doin for the trophy, which will apparently take me 100+ more hours. blah)

I also loved having friends over to play competitive offline as well. What happened to that? Seriously, I still pop in FOM, but hate trying to get all the trophies in R2. View

This was a very impressive article. Well thought out and researched. View

hmmm.....

I'm not sure I like the pricing structure of it. Honestly, I think Sony should shift their focus to devs that put out crap DLC that adds nothing to the game (SFIV for example.)

Basically, I would love Sony to charge to "convince" devs to include as many features on disk as possible. That doesn't mean I'd like to see the end of DLC. But maybe a charge if the content was available within a certain time-frame of release. (hmmm but then you might have exclusive or delayed dlc for the 360) I'm sure there's no easy answer View

you "meant" up until June? well, I can only go by what you write, not what you "mean" k? (what you wrote. "Sony lost $3.3 billion on ps3 overall last June")

And let's clear up the "price drop" thing. I define a pricedrop as going down from 1 price to another, not a sale, not a clearance, but a "permanent" drop, where the price will stay stable at said price. So, IMO, discounting a discontinued model does not qualify as a "pricedrop" (just for the record, I wouldn't consider the 360 dropping the price for the discontinued 20gb model a price drop either)
Secondly, Sony has always had 2 skus running concurrently. (i.e. the 20 and 60 gb models) Always a higher and lower priced model.
That being said, when a higher model is released, and the lower model discontinued and replaced with the previous higher model (as was the case with the 80gb model when the 160 was released) that does not qualify as a price drop, imo, because the current pricing structure still stands, i.e. a $399 and $499 respectfully.

So to reiterate, Sony has only had 1 price drop of $100. When the PS3 debuted, the pricing structure was $599 & $499, and it currently stands at $499 & $399.

Again with the comment that the PS3 is in the red more than the PS2 ever profited. Again, check the math in my one response. Conservative estimate says that the PS2 lifetime earned 18 billion for the company. you, yourself say that the PS3 has lost 4 billion. So where's the other 14 billion in losses that you claim?

Yes, the PS3 is down year over year. and it needs a price drop. but so what. it's still neck and neck with the 360 in sales worldwide this year. And again, I say this. Competition is good. I hope all 3 consoles do well, it's better for us.

PS. If I were you, I wouldn't bring up multiple SKU configurations, because the 360 wins in that category. View

I feel like I'm having a discussion with a little kid.

I don't believe I've made 1 excuse for Sony. In fact, I'm a gamer, I don't really care on what system I game on. I own 2 of the 3 consoles this gen. I've been a gamer for over 20 years.

I now know everything I need to know about you to ignore you and label you, accurately, as a fanboy. I also know that you've run out of FUD to say, as you've clearly moved to a personal attack with no more "facts" to back up your opinion. Re-evaluate my statements and your rebuttal and you will find that I used your links to counter your inaccurate spin. Sony did NOT have 3 price cuts, did NOT lose 3 billion in June and is NOT losing more than it "ever" made on the PS2.

Should Sony be doing better this gen? that's debatable
Is Sony doing poorly this gen? no (20+ million reasons why)
Is the PS3 to expensive? maybe
Could the PS3 use a price cut? absolutely
Has Sony made mistakes this gen? yes, but so has MS and Ninty

You clearly have no understanding of the market, or what's going on with the economy. (MS cut jobs as well) The fact is, that while the PS3 is not where expectations put it, it's not doing bad. 3 consoles CAN survive and do well. It's in gamers' best interest that that stays the case. View

please help yourself with some actual intelligence.

You are stating that the PS3 had 3 price cuts, but all I'm seeing from your links is one from each territory.
If I may use your line of thinking (skewed) the 360 recieved 6 pricecuts per territory (x3) for a grand total of 18 pricecuts over the life of their console. that doesn't make sense does it? no, it doesn't, so get a clue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Also, (from your link http://kotaku.com/5018899/s...
The PS3 did NOT lose over 3 billion in June, they lost 2.16 billion for 2007, and 1.16 billion up until june in 2008. So that's actually 3.32 billion over 15 months (fiscal time)

I actually found a newer article that says the PS3 price is down to about $400 a console.
http://www.gamesindustry.bi...

And in true fanboy spin, you claim that the PS3 has lost more than it ever earned on the PS2 (quote from you "Sony lost more on PS3 than it ever made on the PS2: ") The article you link to, if you would read it, is that the earnings of the PS2 CURRENTLY do not make up for the losses incurred by the PS3. That does NOT mean that the PS3 is losing more that the PS2 ever gained, but that current sales on the PS2 do not make up for the current losses on the PS3.

here's a lil math for you. there are currently 140+ million PS2 sold to date. if you take the current price of the PS2, 129.99, they've made at least 18.2 billion on the PS2, using a conservative estimate, over the life of that console. so you can see, there is no way that Sony has "lost more on PS3 than it ever made on the PS2"

Please try to think before you post biased trolling BS, ok? View

it's not a bad bundle.

It has 2 of the PS3's most popular titles.
Because both titles are entry level titles with sequels out, it will entice the NEW PS3 owners (that's right, existing owners probably won't buy this bundle) to go out and possibly buy the sequels.

It's MUCH better than the 360 bundling games like Kung-Fu Panda (meta: 75)and Lego: Indiana Jones (meta: 77) or even worse, Sega Superstar Tennis (meta: 67)

Sony's bundles include R:FOM (meta: 86) Motorstorm (meta: 82) Uncharted (meta: 88) MGS4 (meta: 94)

360's better bundles. RE5 (meta: 85) and Forza2 (meta: 90) with Marvel: UA (meta: 83) but it seems like they only do this good bundle thing temporarily.

*edit*
can't believe I forgot MS's best bundle, the Halo 3 bundle. lol meta: 94 View

wow. I could not disagree with you more.

The gaming community never said "no" to blu-ray, I believe only 360 fans did. ru Those of us that are smart gamers and consumers realize the value in the system, and don't dismiss it based on price.

blu-ray allows devs to broaden their vision and scope of their project, and that will become more and more evident over the life of the console.

And as for the PS3 competing against cheaper blu-ray players? Sure, I guess that makes sense...... especially if you think the 360 is being hurt by dvd, as was the PS2. View

please provide ur links.

Also, 3 price drops for the PS3? links for that as well. I actually don't recall that many pricedrops. View