• Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    PS3 lets me play online for free. Later consoles don’t.

    PS3 plays CDs and stores media files on its internal hard drive. Later consoles are limited to external storage solutions for media playback (and no, streaming doesn’t count).

    PS3 has a snazzy user interface. Later consoles have… a user interface, I guess.

    PS3 plays PS1 disks. Some models even play PS2 disks. None of the later consoles do that, having a strong reliance on digital downloads for PS1 and PS2 compatibility, meaning some games are straight up limited to the earlier consoles.

    PS3 even lets me transfer games and media to a PSP or PS Vita through a USB connection. Guess what, the later consoles straight up don’t do that.

    Don’t have an HDTV? PS3 works with composite, component, and even S-Video in addition to working with HDMI. It even downscales Blu-ray Disks to fit on your super small screen. Got an HDTV? PS3 upscales your DVDs to fit your super big screen. Later consoles only work with HDMI, and I’m not sure if the upscaling/downscaling thing with DVDs and Blu-ray even works or not.

    The choice is yours.

  • CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    For me, it was:

    • You couldn’t get one for ages when it came out, so I missed the initial hype period.

    • When it did finally become available, it was prohibitively expensive.

    • There are no real killer exclusives or features so no particular reason to upgrade, aside from games looking nicer.

    • Sony is releasing all the good stuff on PC now, so if I want to play a nicer-looking version of a PS4 game I can just do that.

    • Steam Deck

  • Stefen Auris@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s like all we heard about the PS5 was that it was super hard to get when it came out and then it kind of disappeared from our collective consciousness

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    it has no games and was plagued by availability/price issues for a BIG while there.

    why should anyone buy it?

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s a good thing - as the consumer.

      The less exclusives, the better. We don’t need lock-ins, we need open platforms and open systems. If I want a plug&play gaming experience I can buy a console, if I want maximum performance and quality in a more maintenance and setup intensive package I can build my own PC.

    • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Here are the trends with previous consoles:

      PS1 : 455 -> PS2 : 512 -> PS3 : 180 -> PS4 : 58 -> PS5 : 15

      Xbox : 106 -> Xbox 360 : 214 -> Xbox One : 12

      Nintendo 64 : 129 -> Nintendo Wii : 328 -> Nintendo Wii U : 38 -> Nintendo Switch : 174

  • Muffi@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    All the greatest recent games run super well on the Steam Deck, so there’s no need for a giant console cosplaying as a router.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      All the greatest recent games run super well on the Steam Deck

      I get what you are telling here, but it’s not 100% accurate, generally speaking. It might be true for you personally. I own a first gen Steam Deck myself and its just a complementary hardware to my PC (and wonderful at that). It does not run all greatest games at all or in some cases limited and problematic. So “super well” is a little bit exaggerated, but that does not take away how fantastic the device is.