By Chris Kavan - 11/21/12 at 01:07 PM CT
I did not line up to buy the PS3 on the day of launch. In fact, for the longest time the only 7th Generation system I owned was the Nintendo Wii. Let's face it, when the PS3 was launched, the price was a bit on the ridiculous side. But thanks to good old Uncle Sam, who decided everyone deserved a nice refund, I did my part for the economy and dropped money on the system. And while the Wii initially got my attention, as the end of this generation approached, the PS3 has by and far been the system I have put the most time and effort into.
I have to say that one of the main reasons I was drawn to the PS3 has nothing to do with games. Sony was a big proponent of the Blu-Ray format, and, as the battle with HD DVD started to heat up, Sony decided to include a Blu-Ray player built in to the PS3. To me, that was a huge draw. Even years later, I still buy plenty of plain old DVDs, but if I do get a Blu-Ray - my PS3 is my player. Right there is a huge advantage that Sony has over both the Xbox 360 and Wii.
Yet while I enjoy watching plenty on my PS3 - this is a, after all, a gaming console and the ability to watch movies in high-def would mean nothing if I couldn't actually play decent games. While the days of exclusivity seem to be shrinking rapidly, the PS3 still had some great games you could only find on their system: LittleBigPlanet was a great new take on the platforming genre and is still the most customizable game experience I can think of this generation. Ratchet & Clank continues to be a fun diversion while the Uncharted series earned universal praise. Racing fans were blessed with Gran Turismo, hardcore games could challenge themselves with Demon's Souls and people who like to just beat the crap out of things still had the God of War series to enjoy. While I have not played every exclusive, I did enjoy Heavy Rain, InFamous and 3D Dot Game Heroes as well.
I won't deny that PSN has had its share share of troubles. And I agree with the Nelson that the "new and improved" interface is a step backward, but the quality of games is the biggest draw. Yes, Xbox has indie games - lots and lots of indie games. I'm sure there are good ones out there, but then you also have to deal with this. My theory is that for every decent Xbox indie title, there are probably like a dozen that should be buried in the desert along with Atari's E.T. game. PSN, meanwhile, has the Pixeljunk series of games (a bit hit-or-miss, but always interesting at least), Flower, Journey, Shatter, Dead Nation, Super StarDustHD, the newly-released Tokyo Jungle (that I am eager to try out) and WipEout HD Fury. The Wii has its share of titles that are fun, but let's face it, most of its store consists of games you've probably already played or could emulate for free.
There are some things about PS3 that never really caught on: the Move controller is pretty much a half-hearted attempt to cash in on motion controls. I never understood why they even needed such a thing and while the Kinect seems pretty suspect to me, at least it's a fully-supported effort on Microsoft's part. And the Wii was born with motion control, so that's a given. The Move is the red-headed step-child and I don't find it appealing in the least. I also never got the whole Home thing. It was supposed to be this great social networking gathering place, but it just never caught on. I'm sure there are enough people out there who like it to keep it going, but it never reached its potential and I consider it a failure.
I am not an online gamer - I prefer single player to multi-player games and have never really gotten into that aspect. I do know it's free, however, and that must make it better? Right? Eh, I have a feeling the online community between Xbox 360 and PS3 is probably very similar - and if Microsoft can make money charging people for something that should be free - more power to them. Nintendo? Better luck with the WiiU - because the Wii's online capability is pretty much non-existent. In fact, the only place I've played consistent online multiplayer is with Steam - but that's not without its issues. As Jon stated - if you have one person who has a bit slower or incompatible connection issues - it can hamper your experience. I've enjoyed playing online with friends... when things work.
What about Xbox 360 vs. PS3 cross-platform games? There is so much debate on this subject, I could easily write an entire blog on just that. But I find an intriguing argument about this issue, and while it's only one guy voicing his opinion, it makes a lot of sense. Developers didn't like the PS3 as much because, despite the fact it has superior hardware, it takes a lot more effort to make games work for it. I really think that's a big reason why the Fallout, Skyrim, Borderlands and other such games have more issues on the PS3 vs. the Xbox 360. It's a combination between making the most money while exerting the least effort - why bother with making a game batter for a second system when it will work OK - not reason to make it perfect. So the moral of the story - make your system good, but not too good or else you'll pay the price. There are so few cross-platform games for the Wii, it's not even worth mentioning. I will be interested to see how the WiiU compares, however.
Might Sony have bitten off more than it could chew this time around? I know things are looking a bit more grim than I would like to see, but I don't have any problem with sticking with this system. In fact, there are so many games I haven't had the chance to play, I wouldn't be surprised if I stick around with this system well into the next generation (or at least until there is a significant price drop). There are plenty of games on my radar I would love to check out - and with a veritable avalanche of great exclusive games next year: Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch, The Last of Us, Beyond: Two Souls, Remember Me, Until Dawn and Dragon's Crown - to name a few - I have a feeling it will continue to keep me entertained. I, for one, am not jumping for joy over generation 8 while generation 7 still has so much to offer.
Comments
Jonzor - wrote on 11/29/12 at 05:15 PM CT
This from the guy that can't stop bagging on Mario 64's graphics...
The idea that horsepower = graphics is a perspective either dripping with naiveté or an argument over-simplified for the sake of trying to leave someone on the other side of a debate nowhere to stand. That argument is antiquated nonsense, so let's drop the charade. Horsepower drives all sorts of things in a game other than particle effects and textures.
Can better AI make a game better?
Can a better physics engine make a game better?
Can destructible/interactive environments make a game better?
Can larger environments/longer draw distances make a game better?
Can getting those environments with a decent framerate and short load times make a game better?
This isn't 1991. When we moved from the NES to the SNES, yeah, all that got better was the graphics and sound. Game design didn't change a whole lot. The problem is that, now, "good graphics" don't mean squat because EVERYTHING looks good. So now, all that's left is using that horsepower to actually change gameplay. Wasn't Half-Life 2 a better game because of all the crazy fun you could have with the Gravity Gun? That stuff takes horsepower, too.
"... all but eliminated exclusives."
I guess my answer is... so what? If I don't have to buy another console to get the games I want to play then... that's bad? The world isn't a worse place because more people got to play Skyrim and Arkham Asylum without buying a new console. Aside from people are making exclusives for their OWN console, (Nintendo for the Wii, Sony for the PS3, etc...) every exclusive just deprives the gaming population of an experience for little to no reason.
Besides, what do you care? The only real good that comes from a PS3 or Xbox 360 exclusive is better optimization for the hardware so we get more smooth and less jaggy with shorter load times. Doesn't sound like that's your cup of tea.
Nelson Schneider - wrote on 11/29/12 at 12:31 AM CT
I don't really see why horsepower is all that big a deal. I enjoyed the hell out of my Wii, despite the fact that almost every game had jaggies and muddy textures. And I enjoyed the hell out of about half-a-dozen PS3 exclusives.... that didn't really NEED the horsepower to begin with.
Trying to cram too much expensive hardware into a commodity set-top box that plays games is the biggest mistake both Sony and MS made this-gen, as it drove up prices and all but eliminated exclusives. If a dev is going to sink a huge budget into an overwrought HD shooter, that dev will also push it on PC, Xbox, and PS3 in order to get it in front of as many eyeballs as possible.
Jonzor - wrote on 11/28/12 at 05:27 PM CT
I've thought about this for a while, and the one argument I would have tried to include would have been the PS3's status as sort of a hybrid about what I think the 360 and Wii do best... CPU horsepower and exclusive games.
Looking up stuff for my Xbox 360 blog I was shocked how few exclusives the 360 really had. Aside from Halo, Gears of War, and Forza (which are all good franchises) the 360 is pretty bare in terms of games that only it has (and we're not counting Kinect titles).
The Wii, on the other hand, needed more horsepower. Games like The Conduit and Skyward Sword really drove that home for me. That hardware was middle of the road when it came out and was completely in the dust about 4 years later.
The PS3 has a good stable of exclusive titles (though still not enough to field a full roster for a Smash Bros-knock off) all over the board with LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, God of War, Gran Turismo, etc... but also had the horsepower to get good multiplatform stuff.
Best of both worlds.
Chris Kavan - wrote on 11/28/12 at 01:11 PM CT
I don't think you can count Sony out, despite the doom and gloom that's been floating around about them lately. It's almost like they shot themselves in the foot by making their hardware too sophisticated this generation. And yet all that advanced hardware didn't make a whit of difference in regards to their security. I still think the PS3 is the best system, but Sony certainly didn't do themselves many favors.
Nelson Schneider - wrote on 11/23/12 at 04:45 PM CT
Sony always seems to wait until their hardware is just about in the coffin before the really good games start to flow. But with their utter reliance on third-parties that have been sucking it up this-gen (Konami, Capcom, Square Enix), I'm afraid it will be too little, too late.
