Worried about the PS3 fate..

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
Originally posted by: loup garou
Originally posted by: randay
people say the ps3 is a year late, i say its a year early. at any rate, im tired of arguing for today. i can understand people just wanting an upgraded ps2 for cheap, but me myself id rather have something with a lot of potential instead.
Thanks for stopping, I don't think I can handle too much more laughter.

who said i was stopping, i said i was tired.
 

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
also for the argument that "noone has an hdtv anyway", have you ever though about why? whats the point in an hdtv if you have no hd source to plug into it? guess what, i didnt have an hdtv up until 2 weeks ago, guess why? because there was no need for it. you have to have an hd source before buying an hdtv is even a realistic option. especially since sd looks like crap on an hdtv.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: loup garou
Originally posted by: randay
people say the ps3 is a year late, i say its a year early. at any rate, im tired of arguing for today. i can understand people just wanting an upgraded ps2 for cheap, but me myself id rather have something with a lot of potential instead.
Thanks for stopping, I don't think I can handle too much more laughter.

No I agree with randay. The PS3 was rushed to make it out this holiday season. I mean look at the half assed release titles. They obviously could not meet the demand. The hardware needed is causing the system to be very VERY expensive to compete. There is no hard set online infrastructure setup yet.

I mean the PS3 has already had how many firmware upgrades in a month? It's on like version 1.32 or something I believe. That just goes to show you it wasn't ready yet.

IMO they should have waited a while and launched it with a killer launch title. IMO, even the Xbox360 should have waited to launch a little bit, but they didn't and they seem to be doing well.

I agree about the PS3 being rushed. I think it shows how haphazardly Sony developed the PS3. The online libraries weren't ready, component shortages, dev kit shortages, and apparently the games are still not ready. Sony actually released MotoStorm to Japan with it missing most of its features. Really amazing.
 

loup garou

Lifer
Feb 17, 2000
35,132
1
81
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: loup garou
Originally posted by: randay
people say the ps3 is a year late, i say its a year early. at any rate, im tired of arguing for today. i can understand people just wanting an upgraded ps2 for cheap, but me myself id rather have something with a lot of potential instead.
Thanks for stopping, I don't think I can handle too much more laughter.

No I agree with randay. The PS3 was rushed to make it out this holiday season. I mean look at the half assed release titles. They obviously could not meet the demand. The hardware needed is causing the system to be very VERY expensive to compete. There is no hard set online infrastructure setup yet.

I mean the PS3 has already had how many firmware upgrades in a month? It's on like version 1.32 or something I believe. That just goes to show you it wasn't ready yet.

IMO they should have waited a while and launched it with a killer launch title. IMO, even the Xbox360 should have waited to launch a little bit, but they didn't and they seem to be doing well.

I agree about the PS3 being rushed. I think it shows how haphazardly Sony developed the PS3. The online libraries weren't ready, component shortages, dev kit shortages, and apparently the games are still not ready. Sony actually released MotoStorm to Japan with it missing most of its features. Really amazing.
I agree that the actual product is rushed. I mean that by their own announcements, they are almost a year late.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: loup garou
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: loup garou
Originally posted by: randay
people say the ps3 is a year late, i say its a year early. at any rate, im tired of arguing for today. i can understand people just wanting an upgraded ps2 for cheap, but me myself id rather have something with a lot of potential instead.
Thanks for stopping, I don't think I can handle too much more laughter.

No I agree with randay. The PS3 was rushed to make it out this holiday season. I mean look at the half assed release titles. They obviously could not meet the demand. The hardware needed is causing the system to be very VERY expensive to compete. There is no hard set online infrastructure setup yet.

I mean the PS3 has already had how many firmware upgrades in a month? It's on like version 1.32 or something I believe. That just goes to show you it wasn't ready yet.

IMO they should have waited a while and launched it with a killer launch title. IMO, even the Xbox360 should have waited to launch a little bit, but they didn't and they seem to be doing well.

I agree about the PS3 being rushed. I think it shows how haphazardly Sony developed the PS3. The online libraries weren't ready, component shortages, dev kit shortages, and apparently the games are still not ready. Sony actually released MotoStorm to Japan with it missing most of its features. Really amazing.
I agree that the product is rushed. I mean that by their own announcements, they are almost a year late.

It's ok though. The Europeans don't mind waiting...in fact, they love it!
 

VWhed

Senior member
Jan 23, 2004
816
0
71
I am waiting for a while to pick up any of the "big 3".... I saw a few PS3's at Wally World and no "vicious mob". It won't fail, it's just gonna take a while to pick up the pace
 

Dritnul

Senior member
Jan 9, 2006
781
0
0
where i work we get about 1-2 calls per hour asking for Wii's and we get about 1 call a week asking for PS3's

could be that no1 wants a PS3 seems like about 4/5 ppl who bought one just wanted to sell it
or it could be ppl just dont expect to actually get a ps3
either way sony kinda ****** it up here
 

randay

Lifer
May 30, 2006
11,019
216
106
Originally posted by: Dritnul
where i work we get about 1-2 calls per hour asking for Wii's and we get about 1 call a week asking for PS3's

could be that no1 wants a PS3 seems like about 4/5 ppl who bought one just wanted to sell it
or it could be ppl just dont expect to actually get a ps3
either way sony kinda ****** it up here

You work at Nintendo?!
 

Linux23

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
11,303
671
126
If you all knew the power of the dark side - Sony.



It's gonna take time, but the fanboys will buy the PS3 without blinking twice.
 

VIAN

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2003
6,575
1
0
The PS3 is Sony?s endeavor to market themselves 3 times: Cell, Blu-Ray, and Playstation. Because of their greed, we are forced to pay 600 bucks for a Hi-def console that doesn't even come with Hi-def cables. Sure, it is an impressive piece of hardware for an amazing price, but the price is too high for a gaming console, and the mainstream won't go for it.

It is nuts for Sony to push a price so high, but then again, they haven?t done anything right for a while. The success of the PSX was luck. They just happened to release the PSX at the right time, which made them look better compared to the other two idiots, who released with only a small amount of games to play. The PSX was so popular that the PS2, as mediocre as the technology was (4MB of VRAM?), sold out fast. Sony probably expects it to happen the same way with the PS3, but I think they shot themselves in the foot with Blu-Ray, which delayed the PS3 for far too long.

There are many things that could prevent the PS3?s success, including: high price, no good online support, 360 user base, and high price, and even the Wii. I predict that this generation will be a long and painful struggle for Sony. Why pay 500 bucks when you could get a similar or better gaming experience with the 360 for only $400. I say a better experience because of the near free 2xAA and the 360 controller. I loved the Dreamcast controller and the evolution from that to this 360 controller has only improved it. The analog sticks on the new SixAxis, as well as the trigger buttons pale in comfort and usability compared with the 360 controller. And again, there is also the possibility of getting better graphics on the 360 due to the 10MB of on die memory in the 360 GPU.

If the 360 has a bigger user base than the PS3, where do you think developers are going to go? Think about that. And at such a high price, there is no way the PS3 user base will grow quick enough to compete with the 360. Then think about how difficult developers find the PS3 to program in comparison to the 360. Two big issues developers have against the PS3 that will surely result in the 360 taking the trophy this time around.

If there is one thing that can save Sony, it'll be the mainstream?s reluctance to upgrade from the PS2. But at least, for Sony?s sake, they?ll buy games which will offset some of the cost of the PS3. The PS3 may be such a large leap in price for them that they may just settle for the 360. One thing fanbois have to learn is that you're only hurting yourself with brand loyalty.
 

Eeezee

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
9,923
0
0
Yup, Sony kept shipping units to everyone's surprise and now a bunch of people are stuck with playstations that they don't want. You can't even get your money back on ebay, you'd have to take it back to the store for a return.

The system isn't very good right now. I attribute this to two things.

1) Only one good game, and that's Resistance: Fall of Man. Given a year of development, the PS3 will quickly gain ground on the Wii and the 360. Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy will bring everyone back to Sony. It remains the best RPG console.

2) Lack of good multiplayer. Sony leaving it up to the developers was a poor move on their part. Hopefully it pans out in a good way, if we're lucky.
 

Eeezee

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
9,923
0
0
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
> 95% backwards compatibility so games like FF XII and God of War are playable
Good reviews as a blu-ray player (just needs remote)
Roughly as good as Xbox360 for games (launch titles ports a little worse)


Once supply is there and a few more good games are out (including ports), I think enough people will choose it over the 360 that it will be at least a modest success.

I agree with this post. Some say that Microsoft delivers to its customers, but what about backwards compatability? The Xbox 360's backwards compatability sucks at best, and it lags; the emulation software is poorly designed, or there's some issue with the hardware that I'm unaware of.

I'm not sure what Sony is doing with its backwards compatability. I recall that the PS2 essentially had the PS1 hardware inside the box to preserve 100% compatability. The PS3 is big enough to contain the PS2 and PS1 hardware, and I'm not certain why some games aren't compatable with the PS3. Something about an official stamp and fairy dust. I don't really remember.

In one year I think the PS3 will be competing with the Wii rather than the 360. I predict another loss for Microsoft. It's a pity too, I really like Gears of War.
 

ntdz

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2004
6,989
0
0
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Originally posted by: randay

I define a BD drive as allowing you to play high definition movies and read high capacity disks up to 50GB(for now). without one, you cannot use your HTPC to do these things. As someone pointed out, an HD-DVD drive would also suffice but would bring the cost up by at least 200 dollars.

Oh also...

Im glad we got that settled.

I could also spend some ludicrous money on a UMD drive to make the HTPC more useable by your definition...but I wouldn't...just like I wouldn't put a BD drive in my HTPC. Both of those are non-standard media formats that I'm not interested in. Your BD drive makes your PS3 no more useable for the normal consumer who is not interested in BD.

huh? I thought this was settled. btw, did you forget which post you originally replied to and the point you were trying to make?

Anyway if you're not interested in view high definition movies and playing high definition games, of course your not going to be interested in a PS3. duh. god.

umm thats not true. you don't need to an HDTV to play PS3 games. you can't even play in HD out of the box, you have to buy an additional cable.

and considering that what, 10% of all TV's out there are HDTV's, are you saying the PS3 is only for those 10% of people?

it's obvious you own a ps3 and are trying to defend your $600 purchase, but to say that if you aren't interested in HD means you can't be interested in a PS3 is a stupid comment to make.

What if you just wanna play RFOM or MGS4 and don't care about resolution, and care about the gameplay?

If you don't care about graphics, then buy the wii. It's a pretty fun console. 360 is the best of both worlds for me. 1) It's not made by arrogant pricks like the PS3, 2) It came out a year earlier and $200 cheaper, and 3) It was significantly better games (Gears of War anyone??
 

trevor0323

Senior member
Jan 4, 2006
356
0
71
I don't know what people are so worried about. I think eventually the PS3 will again be the dominate system similar to the first two. The system is well worth the $600, here is an example:

Xbox 360
-Top of the line system
-150 more for HD DVD add on player
$550 total

PS3
-Top of the line system with overall more power than the 360
-Included Blu-Ray player
-$600

I also previously owned a 360 and sold it to buy a PS3 in the future. None of the games really appealed to me greatly and I predict eventually quality game releases will be in greater abundance for the PS3 than the 360.

Also, the launch games are almost exactly the same as the 360's launch. The 360 had one good but not great game in Call of Duty 2, all of the sports games were rushed for the launch and all the other games were crap. The PS3 launched with Resistance (good but not great), and its sports launch titles seem to be a little less rushed than the 360's.

As far as XBOX live goes I found it to be quite worthless. Every time I tried to play Call of Duty 2 it was extremely laggy and would restart every so often because of it. There would be maybe 7 or 8 people in games at a time if you were lucky. I know this is probably fixed now but when 360 launch live play was pretty poor. I also am not really that keen on playing the old games on live arcade. If I really wanted to do that I would break out my old systems and relive the classics. Just last week I was trying to play Street Fighter 2 at my friends house on live arcade and the controls were just terrible. What good is playing street fighter 2 if you cant pull of the Hudoken's on a regular basis.

Anyways I don't predict PS3 being a failure as a system, a crappy launch, maybe, but equally crappy as the 360 launch.
 

Eeezee

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
9,923
0
0
Originally posted by: VIAN
The PS3 is Sony?s endeavor to market themselves 3 times: Cell, Blu-Ray, and Playstation. Because of their greed, we are forced to pay 600 bucks for a Hi-def console that doesn't even come with Hi-def cables. Sure, it is an impressive piece of hardware for an amazing price, but the price is too high for a gaming console, and the mainstream won't go for it.

I agree, the price is very high for a pure gaming console. However, I feel the same way about the 360; the price is too high. Those who say that less than 15% of American households have HDTV have forgotten another important statistic: How many of those owners are also gamers? A large number, whereas the percentage of Americans that actually play console games is probably around the same number. Gaming is not what one would consider a mainstream activity. Gamers will go for it, and they are going for it. By next year there won't be any question as to whether or not the PS3 is a contender, by then it will have as many great titles as the 360 and that's really saying something considering the time difference of a year.


It is nuts for Sony to push a price so high, but then again, they haven?t done anything right for a while. The success of the PSX was luck. They just happened to release the PSX at the right time, which made them look better compared to the other two idiots, who released with only a small amount of games to play. The PSX was so popular that the PS2, as mediocre as the technology was (4MB of VRAM?), sold out fast. Sony probably expects it to happen the same way with the PS3, but I think they shot themselves in the foot with Blu-Ray, which delayed the PS3 for far too long.

The success of the PSX really wasn't just luck. The console had killer games. The EXISTENCE of the PSX was just luck. Its success formula was obvious, get some killer games going for it and you're golden. The execs at Sony used a new tactic with the PS2, and that was to release a console that could survive up to 5 years. Well, it worked beautifully. The PS2 is still a strong console system with tons of great games. It was the clear winner of its era, and not because of the PSX. The PS2 is superior to the PSX in every way, including gaming library. That same strategy of designing a console with a long shelf life is what they're applying to the PS3. The 360 was released a year earlier and is only now experiencing some good title releases. The PS3 will be out 4-5 months before Metal Gear Solid hits. Three final fantasy games are just a year away. A year from now you'll already have over half a dozen exclusive titles that are absolutely awesome, whereas the 360 will have Halo 3 and Gears of War, a paltry list to say the least.

There are many things that could prevent the PS3?s success, including: high price, no good online support, 360 user base, and high price, and even the Wii. I predict that this generation will be a long and painful struggle for Sony. Why pay 500 bucks when you could get a similar or better gaming experience with the 360 for only $400. I say a better experience because of the near free 2xAA and the 360 controller. I loved the Dreamcast controller and the evolution from that to this 360 controller has only improved it. The analog sticks on the new SixAxis, as well as the trigger buttons pale in comfort and usability compared with the 360 controller. And again, there is also the possibility of getting better graphics on the 360 due to the 10MB of on die memory in the 360 GPU.

The high price is a detriment, but I believe it can be overcome. After all, the 360 has a high price. Realistically, the PS3 doesn't cost much more than an xbox, and you get a lot more for your money. It's a better value. Why do people buy products at stores like Costco when they cost more? Because they receive more than their money's worth. The bold argument that the PS3 costs sooooo much more is really just lack of thought.

Let's not forget, you may have loved the Dreamcast, but it was a clear flop of a console. Frankly, I prefer the playstation controller to the 360 controller. I preferred the PS2 controller to the xbox controller too. Different strokes for different folks. However, there is no possibility of getting "better graphics" on the 360 if you're considering raw hardware capability.

If the 360 has a bigger user base than the PS3, where do you think developers are going to go? Think about that. And at such a high price, there is no way the PS3 user base will grow quick enough to compete with the 360. Then think about how difficult developers find the PS3 to program in comparison to the 360. Two big issues developers have against the PS3 that will surely result in the 360 taking the trophy this time around.

The developers have already allied themselves with one console or the other. Frankly, most companies are producing for multiple platforms. The bEST exclusive titles are already being produced for the playstation. By next December the PS3 user base will easily rival that of the 360 if it hasn't arleady surpassed it. The PS3 is still THE console for the best exclusive RPGs. Explain why the developers have chosen PS3 when the Xbox 360 should be equally viable for great RPG games.

If there is one thing that can save Sony, it'll be the mainstream?s reluctance to upgrade from the PS2. But at least, for Sony?s sake, they?ll buy games which will offset some of the cost of the PS3. The PS3 may be such a large leap in price for them that they may just settle for the 360. One thing fanbois have to learn is that you're only hurting yourself with brand loyalty.

Again, there really isn't a huge leap in price between the 360 and the PS3. The $400 Xbox 360 is essentially the $500 PS3 minus Blu-Ray.

Unfortunately, your last sentence only applies to you in this debate. If you'd take a good hard look at the facts, the PS3 is going to be the more valuable pruchase. The 360 is great if you want to play some FPS multiplayer, but the PS3 is going to have a wider selection of exclusive titles that everyone will inevitably want to play. Consider this

Resident Evil Series
Final Fantasy Series
Metal Gear Series
Various other previewable games that look absolutely amazing

Versus

Gears of War
Halo 3

The price difference is essentially null if you ever plan on playing back HD content. Part of the beauty of the PS3 is that 3 years from now a lot more people will want to be able to play HD movies. I think we're seriously underestimating the rate of adaptation for the average American. Not that long ago we were just barely being introduced to the DVD.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,854
17,365
136
The playstation 3 will have exclusive rights over Final Fantasy and others because of Sony's hard-assed business tactics, NOT because of their superior game machine.

I dont have stock in Sony and most of the folks here arent interested in making money from them, they are interested in playing some damn games. And thats where sony fails.
Their new toy is much more useful to people as a money-making device than an entertainment system, and it would appear the fainboi's best argument is now "you just wait!".

Why?
Why should people pay a ridiculous amount of money for something that really isnt useful now and has no genuine guarantee of usefulness in the future?

I hear lots of hot arguments from the sony lovers out there but nobody has been able to explain this to me yet.

Though I do have to agree with some folks here on one point:
If they had just waited one more year, put out tons of units and dropped the price, and got a bunch of games in the library this thing would have been sweet. As such its like a big roast I pulled out of the oven early. It doesnt look too bad, and I know its going to be sweet when done, but darn it, pulling it out early and looking at it just makes me even more hungry. Not too mention angry that I still have a long time left.
 

theGlove

Senior member
Jan 13, 2005
884
0
0

Too expensive

Who's gonna jack down $600 to $750 for a console? People with good paying jobs and people who have huge credit card debts.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
plus the fact of sonys shadyness from rootkit to bluray, many of us would simply rather not give sony any money right now
 

rockyct

Diamond Member
Jun 23, 2001
6,656
32
91
Originally posted by: theGlove

Too expensive

Who's gonna jack down $600 to $750 for a console? People with good paying jobs and people who have huge credit card debts.

$500 is a great deal for people with an HDTV because if they have an HDTV, they can probably afford a PS3. Sony was caught in a tough spot because the bluray is causing all the delays and extra costs, but it really does make it a next gen console. Anyway, I think the three console will end up with around the same market share in the end but ranked xbox, wii, and PS3. The wii is really the wild card in this round. The motion controller is cool, but it remains to be seen whether developers take advantage of it to keep it from just becoming a gimmick.
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,714
164
106
Originally posted by: Eeezee

Unfortunately, your last sentence only applies to you in this debate. If you'd take a good hard look at the facts, the PS3 is going to be the more valuable pruchase. The 360 is great if you want to play some FPS multiplayer, but the PS3 is going to have a wider selection of exclusive titles that everyone will inevitably want to play. Consider this

Resident Evil Series
Final Fantasy Series
Metal Gear Series
Various other previewable games that look absolutely amazing

Versus

Gears of War
Halo 3

Huh? Do you really think those will be the only 360 exclusives that people will want to play? Seriously?

How about:
1) Mass Effect
2) Bioshock
3) Lost Planet
4) Forza 2
5) Blue Dragon
6) Crackdown
7) Lost Odyssey
8) Halo Wars
9) The next Splinter Cell
10) Too Human

Not to mention that the next installment of the biggest PS2 system seller in North America, Grand Theft Auto, will be coming to both the 360 and the PS3 at the same time...so I'm not so sure that Sony will have the only exclusives that people will want to play. Gears of War is an amazing start to exclusives as well. It is such an amazingingly fun game and I'm having a blast with the Lost Planet online demo as well.
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,403
1
0
Originally posted by: randay
people say the ps3 is a year late, i say its a year early.

LMFAO!

Just because you say it doesn't make it so and doesn't make it any less moronic.

 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,403
1
0
Originally posted by: trevor0323
The system is well worth the $600, here is an example:

Xbox 360
-Top of the line system
-150 more for HD DVD add on player
$550 total

PS3
-Top of the line system with overall more power than the 360
-Included Blu-Ray player
-$600

Let me try to explain this: the HD DVD and Blu-Ray don't mean jack to the overwhelming majority of gamers. The general public doesn't even know they exist, and most of those who do know don't care. People don't buy game consoles for optical drives. With the 360, the drive is OPTIONAL. With the PS3, you're going to pay for it whether you want the thing or not. You're going to pay for it whether you see the value in it or not.

Yes, the PS3 is a good value given the things that it comes with. But if it also baked bread and BBQ'ed chicken, that doesn't mean people would spend another $200 on it. People wouldn't care about the value of the purchase because a big chunk of the expense is for auxiliary crap they weren't interested in purchasing.

Anyway, THAT'S the difference between the PS3 and the 360.
 

CVSiN

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2004
9,301
0
0
Originally posted by: trevor0323
I don't know what people are so worried about. I think eventually the PS3 will again be the dominate system similar to the first two. The system is well worth the $600, here is an example:

Xbox 360
-Top of the line system
-150 more for HD DVD add on player
$550 total

PS3
-Top of the line system with overall more power than the 360
-Included Blu-Ray player
-$600

I also previously owned a 360 and sold it to buy a PS3 in the future. None of the games really appealed to me greatly and I predict eventually quality game releases will be in greater abundance for the PS3 than the 360.

Also, the launch games are almost exactly the same as the 360's launch. The 360 had one good but not great game in Call of Duty 2, all of the sports games were rushed for the launch and all the other games were crap. The PS3 launched with Resistance (good but not great), and its sports launch titles seem to be a little less rushed than the 360's.

As far as XBOX live goes I found it to be quite worthless. Every time I tried to play Call of Duty 2 it was extremely laggy and would restart every so often because of it. There would be maybe 7 or 8 people in games at a time if you were lucky. I know this is probably fixed now but when 360 launch live play was pretty poor. I also am not really that keen on playing the old games on live arcade. If I really wanted to do that I would break out my old systems and relive the classics. Just last week I was trying to play Street Fighter 2 at my friends house on live arcade and the controls were just terrible. What good is playing street fighter 2 if you cant pull of the Hudoken's on a regular basis.

Anyways I don't predict PS3 being a failure as a system, a crappy launch, maybe, but equally crappy as the 360 launch.


lol... you do know thats wasnt Live's fault.. that was poor coding on COD2 which was fixed..

there are over 100 other great titles on the 360.. most of the launch was far superior to what sony brought..
and guess what genius.. PS3 hardware is all the same age (last years tech) as the 360.. so there fore the ps3 is already a year old ebfore it started.. same gen vid chip by Nvidia.. its a modified 6800 series chipset already 2 gens old..
Devs are saying there is literally NO power difference in the 2 systems other than blueray which same devs like and others hate..

and for the record.. gears of war sucked ass..

if you played the first 10 mins.. you played the whole game.
MS has 10x the show stopper exclusives this time around.. and all Sony has up thier sleeves are some tired old Japanese francises..

you can keep MGS.. you can keep RE.. you can keep FF.. they are all garbage..




 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |