What is Gaming Today?

[tonzie]

It sucks, that's what.


Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty: World at War, and every other generic money grabbing game out there are some prime examples.

These games aren't good, not in the least. They are meant to hook mindless young audience members into spending millions of dollars and hours doing the EXACT SAME THING.

There is no innovation there, there is no fun in that, there is no evolution in gaming.
Not only that, but every game out there is striving to be like Call of Duty, because "is sooh 1337" and it "defines the new age of gaming"

F*** that, it's a bunch of the same old boring shit gathered into a big cesspool.

One of the things that made me realize this was Resistance 2. It's predecessor was amazing, innovative, and damn fun, even for a generic boring ol' first person shooter. But then look at its sequel. Resistance 2 took so many features from Call of Duty, even the health system was revised. Yes, maybe they tried to incorporate it into the story, but it's still noticeable. Everything from the way weapons are carried to your melee attack was changed, and now resembles something like big piece of poo in the war.

This thread isn't just meant to bash Call of Doody, (although it is one of the prime examples of pieces of poop out there) It's meant to ask you a question.

What are you seeing in games right now? Do you want to keep ssing the same old boring First Person Shooter come out over and over? Or do you want to see some variation? Lets see some classic style RPGs, give us another Final Fantasy VII, or better yet, CHRONO TRIGGER!

When I say I want there to be some variation, I don't mean I just want more genres either. I want GOOD games to come out, games that are worth buying because of their enthralling, time eating, memorizing stories, or their beautiful art direction that's capable of grabbing your mind and throwing it into the world along with the main protagonists.

Yes, there have been some different games out there lately, but they have been bad different and not good different, not in the least. So give those Cawl uf Doody like clones some good competition, and show them what the thinking mans game can bring to the table.

Lol what a rant and now it's over.

[Deathvein]

I thought that CoD4 was excellent, but like you said, Infinity Ward are money-grabbing bastards.

If Valve had respect for the PS3, then I'm sure The Orange Box would have been heavily supported in terms of free DLC, and we'd have Left 4 Dead by now.

[Fleech]

Gaming is huge business these days so of course the temptation is there for developers and publishers to milk money from rehashed games, especially as development costs continue to grow. What's more, as time goes on it's inevitable that innovation is harder to come by, since so many ideas have already been used.

That said, this isn't an issue that has suddenly sprung up this generation; there has always been lots of mindless money grabbing crap released. Likewise there are still plenty of great games being made. Sure FPSs (wrongly) get most of the hype, but just ignore them and buy something else if you're tired of them. It's what I'm doing at the moment, Bioshock aside.

What games are you referring to as being 'bad different', out of interest?

[tonzie]

Gaming is huge business these days so of course the temptation is there for developers and publishers to milk money from rehashed games, especially as development costs continue to grow. What's more, as time goes on it's inevitable that innovation is harder to come by, since so many ideas have already been used.

That said, this isn't an issue that has suddenly sprung up this generation; there has always been lots of mindless money grabbing crap released. Likewise there are still plenty of great games being made. Sure FPSs (wrongly) get most of the hype, but just ignore them and buy something else if you're tired of them. It's what I'm doing at the moment, Bioshock aside.

What games are you referring to as being 'bad different', out of interest?


Haha I've been trying to do so, and I guess it's getting me by, LBP and MGS4 have kept me in the game, if it wasn't for them then I would have probably just stopped playing videogames out of frustration.

And some of the games I'm referring to are games like Buzz, or Echochrome hahaha. Personally I didn't find those games fun at all.

[Wilebore]

all are really money grabbing bastards, thats the only reason the do what they do, because gaming is such a thriving market.

Mirrors edge is a different game i wouldnt say its the same at all.

[WeLsh_bEn]

Its like anything else, its to make money.

Im not that annoyed at £40 games, as PS2 games were £30-£35.

[Laika]

The sad truth is that the formula exists for a reason: it works. Personally I see COD4 as an accidental mutated cousin of the formula, given it was one of the first times I've had on 'OH MY GOD NO!' moments when a character dies. Sure, the enemies aren't the most original in the world, Russians and Middle-eastern, but in order to go down the route of the contemporary and familiar, we have to base it on what is contemporary and familiar. Post 9-11, a modern, contemporary war-game without the Middle-east doesn't exist.

To be honest, I cannot comment on FFVII because I have never had the pleasure to play it (Gasp! I know.) and to be honest, I don't really have the intention to either. Personally from my experience with the Final Fantasy Series (FFX, up to Seymour Flux, the difficult bastard.) it was fairly imaginative but really lacked the immersive storyline I'm familiar within the realms of cinema (granted, there's also a heap load more of absolute tripe too).

Personally I'm ridiculously over hyped for Heavy Rain, in this regard, after only today reading an article in OPMuk about it, the article starting with 'I don't make games for the Daily Mail', pretty much summing up my ethos. I'll scan it in soonish, I don't really see it fair for you to pay £5.99 just for that article.


all are really money grabbing bastards, thats the only reason the do what they do, because gaming is such a thriving market.

Mirrors edge is a different game i wouldnt say its the same at all.

Personally I'd say it is a fairly inventive premise for a game, but the storyline is absolutely pathetic.

[steedster]

It looks like the "different" game is on the rise, look at Mirror's edge, LBP and even Bioshock as a different FPS.

Developers are starting to notice that gamers don't want just the same game released over and over with better graphics.

[Richie]

Poor Laika... the story to FFX get's so much better beyond that point. It truly is one of the best storylines in games imo.

[Laika]

Fuck off am I overdriving all my Aeons.

I read the rest on wikipedia, sounded quite good. Still, Final Fantasy seems... I don't know, I dislike it a little for some reason. Maybe it's the anti-fanboy in me?

[WeLsh_bEn]

FF iv never liked.

[tonzie]

The sad truth is that the formula exists for a reason: it works. Personally I see COD4 as an accidental mutated cousin of the formula, given it was one of the first times I've had on 'OH MY GOD NO!' moments when a character dies. Sure, the enemies aren't the most original in the world, Russians and Middle-eastern, but in order to go down the route of the contemporary and familiar, we have to base it on what is contemporary and familiar. Post 9-11, a modern, contemporary war-game without the Middle-east doesn't exist.

To be honest, I cannot comment on FFVII because I have never had the pleasure to play it (Gasp! I know.) and to be honest, I don't really have the intention to either. Personally from my experience with the Final Fantasy Series (FFX, up to Seymour Flux, the difficult bastard.) it was fairly imaginative but really lacked the immersive storyline I'm familiar within the realms of cinema (granted, there's also a heap load more of absolute tripe too).

Personally I'm ridiculously over hyped for Heavy Rain, in this regard, after only today reading an article in OPMuk about it, the article starting with 'I don't make games for the Daily Mail', pretty much summing up my ethos. I'll scan it in soonish, I don't really see it fair for you to pay £5.99 just for that article.



Personally I'd say it is a fairly inventive premise for a game, but the storyline is absolutely pathetic.


First of all, Final Fantasy X is the WORST (although, still good hahaha) out of all the Final Fantasys in my opinion. If I gave FFX a 8, I would give both FFVII and FFIX a 20, out of 10 of course.
(No pressure to get the games, but just to let you know incase you change your mind ;) )

And Mirrors Edge, it is bad. It's one of those games that takes a mediocre Idea, slaps an engine together, and then writes a story around it. Some people may like it, but to me it looks like a big pile of high jumping poo.
(Yes I played it, it does look nice, but there is nothing breathtaking about it, nothing that actually grabs your attention.)

The point I'm trying to establish is, while realizing that every developer is out there to make money as well, some of them should at least care about delivering a good solid story. That is what sold in the Final Fantasy series, or ANY RPG in that case. Also, look at Uncharted: Drakes Fortune. Great game, awesome story, mixed with good but not outdated gameplay. We need more games like this, not games that train us to aim a gun with a controller while wasting away on our couches screaming UAV.

Also, it makes me kind of sad that there is a possibility that we will never see a sprite based game on any of the next gen consoles. Yes, sprites are outdated, but in my opinion, they are one of the best looking art styles out there for a game. Also, art direction is a big factor, so if that style is adored by a lot of people, it will sell.

Yet, it isn't, because it hasn't been given a chance.

That was possibly the least understandable rant I've given, but it speaks what's on my mind. If the developer leans towards pleasing us in those way, I think they could make even more money than Infinity Ward and Treyarch combined.

[Fleech]

(Mirror's Edge...Yes I played it, it does look nice, but there is nothing breathtaking about it, nothing that actually grabs your attention.)


All just opinions I know, but it grabbed my attention instantly. I'll agree though that the story was crap (I doubt there are many that wouldn't).


We need more games like this, not games that train us to aim a gun with a controller while wasting away on our couches screaming UAV.

No, what we need is both. That way everyone's happy. There's nothing wrong with playing some dumb, generic shooter now and again. It was fun in the past and it's fun now.


Also, it makes me kind of sad that there is a possibility that we will never see a sprite based game on any of the next gen consoles. Yes, sprites are outdated, but in my opinion, they are one of the best looking art styles out there for a game. Also, art direction is a big factor, so if that style is adored by a lot of people, it will sell.

Yet, it isn't, because it hasn't been given a chance.

I appreciate the frustration, but times change and things move on. Sure sprites are largely a thing of the past, but there are still games being made with unique and interesting art styles. It's not all realistic browns and greys.


If the developer leans towards pleasing us in those way, I think they could make even more money than Infinity Ward and Treyarch combined.

Except of course that making a brilliant game is no guarantee whatsoever of it actually selling well. Especially when 'brilliance' is entirely subjective anyway.

[Bazzer.]

i like cod4, but i do think it was a tad over-rated.

in OPM UK magasine every review compares the game to cod4, thats fuckin stupid.

as for games i think theres been plenty of new innovative games, endwar, LBP to name 2. but theres been a lot of solid games, get fallout if you like RPGs, and i personally think R2 was made better.

2008 was a good year for all consoles, and 09 will get a lot better i am sure

[Laika]

I am the only person in the world that thinks the Uncharted storyline wasn't really that good... at all? It was very Indiana Jones, NEW Indiana Jones...

And we all know children, that isn't good.

BUT, conversely, for a game it was quite good. If that makes any sense at all.

[tonzie]

I am the only person in the world that thinks the Uncharted storyline wasn't really that good... at all? It was very Indiana Jones, NEW Indiana Jones...

And we all know children, that isn't good.

BUT, conversely, for a game it was quite good. If that makes any sense at all.

Haha yeah, that makes sense, and honestly I think you're right. (about the Indiana Jones feel to it) But I enjoyed that. :)



No, what we need is both. That way everyone's happy. There's nothing wrong with playing some dumb, generic shooter now and again. It was fun in the past and it's fun now...

I appreciate the frustration, but times change and things move on. Sure sprites are largely a thing of the past, but there are still games being made with unique and interesting art styles. It's not all realistic browns and greys.


Actually, that is a good point. Both would be a good combination, and hopefully we'll see that soon.

As for art direction leaning towards different styles it does make sense, however in my opinion the sprite style (SNES Square games like Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, and Final Fantasy) is the most attractive. It lets you see a world as a story, and less as a serious real life experience (Which I think gets really boring really fast)

Also, while we're on the topic of art styles: Resistance 2.
Personally, I loved the direction Insomniac took the style. They got rid of the dreary boring realistic look and went for more of a cartoony(but not overly so) colorful, bright style. It was one of the things I enjoyed most in Resistance 2.

[Oyarsa]

Call of Duty, World at War has inner beauty of epic proportions that not many people seem to realize. Whereas Modern Warfare was nothing but a fictional game with perhaps some underlying message, World at War takes a rather rare approach and focusses on the Eastern Front of World War 2 - still the absolute bloodiest and deadliest event in mankind, and manages to accurately display just what shaped our world today.

If you have studied a lot of World War 2 history (which I highly recommend, nerd rage and all, seeing as the scope of those events are often sadly underestimated) you will start to appreciate what Treyarch did with World at War. I can't say I care too much about the Japanese campaign, mostly because they didn't have too many epic battles there to begin with (compared to, of course).

With the entire mindset of the Great Patriotic War, as the Russians called the Eastern Front, paired with the immense sense of pride and love for their motherland, the Eastern Front campaign is a staggering combustion of excellence. I agree that they skipped some key events that they shouldn't have (Leningrad and Moscow, for instance), though when you reach the Reichstag everything is simply justified.

I have been to the Reichstag, and the way it has been recreated with the utmost finesse is amazing. Not only that, it was a tremendous key point in World War 2 for the Russians, if not the most important. The race to Berlin centered around getting the Reichstag, and it's done beautifully in World at War - grasping the sense of urgency and consequence of every bullet shot in Berlin.

Perhaps games are going down the drain. Actually, RPGs are, like Square's games, which are complete shit. Other games are advancing, and I personally think for the better. We used to play shooters like Quake and Unreal - all practically the same but no complaints at the time. Now we play shooters that can graphically immerse us to a point no classic game ever could, Bioshock and World at War for instance, and I wouldn't want it any other way.

Fighting games look amazingly detailed and have the utmost fluid gameplay. Online co-op is almost a given these days. Racing games have come so far as to mimic actual physics and give us the impression we're driving the real thing. Horror games are capable of making us feel like we are actually on a space ship trying to survive. Everything but RPGs are evolving, just like they should.

It has always just been about money, so I don't see an epiphany there. They released videogames for money back in the 80's, and things haven't changed since. Sure, the industry grew tremendously, but the ethics and principals are still quite linear.

Just think if they released Bioshock back in 1995. The world would stop rotating and we'd still see it on MSN.com's main page today. We've become spoiled and fail to realize just how much we truly have right now. Unless you look at JRPGs/RPGs, which have indeed gone down the drain and have no savior on the horizon either.

Classic games are fun, but mostly for the retro vanity of it. Nostalgia creates false opinions, and makes us believe the past was better than the present; in most cases it's not. The Quake 3 Arena multiplayer was awesome back in the day, and I have the fondest memories of it. Sadly, with the Resistance 2 MP right now, and Killzone 2 MP coming soon, Quake 3 Arena would be better left uninstalled. It simply can't match today's standards anymore, much like every other game that doesn't just completely rely on story (RPG).

It's just like cars. There's people claiming classic cars were much better than today's "modern crap". That's, of course, nothing but bullshit. I love classic muscle cars, but I can't do anything but admit that today's cars far outclass the old. Nostalgic memories =/= better quality.

(and look what happens when they try something "new". We get shit like Mirror's Edge. Please, no.)

[Fleech]

(and look what happens when they try something "new". We get shit like Mirror's Edge. Please, no.)

Personal opinions on individual games aside, that sentance implies that developers shouldn't being trying new things, which is patently ridiculous. Modern technology of course allows for somes stunningly immersive games, but sometimes graphics and immersion are not enough if it still ultimately feels like the same thing you've played countless times before.

If developers never tried new things we'd all be playing Pong HD.

[Haza103]

Activision is extremely lazy! After buying Quantum of Solace hearing "Oh, it's as good as Goldeneye!" I was thrilled! I stuck it in my PS3 and played it and what sprung to mind is "Hey, this is an awful lot like Call of Duty......." I Had not realised up until the next time i played it who developed it. After letting the intro title play through while i was looking at something on my laptop activision and treyarch popped up. What a waste of £30.....

The worst part is they have the cheeck to use exactly the same engine on a film based game that is so different. It's not modern warfare, it's james Bond. It reeks of COD. The worst part is that when you fall to your death online, the exact same symbol pops up as in COD 4!

In summary, whoever said quantum of solace is as good as goldeneye has a serious lack of knowledge about gaming. Goldeneye rules, even in its Pixelated glory!

[tonzie]

Call of Duty, World at War has inner beauty of epic proportions that not many people seem to realize. Whereas Modern Warfare was nothing but a fictional game with perhaps some underlying message, World at War takes a rather rare approach and focusses on the Eastern Front of World War 2 - still the absolute bloodiest and deadliest event in mankind, and manages to accurately display just what shaped our world today...

...(and look what happens when they try something "new". We get shit like Mirror's Edge. Please, no.)

Lol obviously you're one of those people blinded by graphics and cool looking guns.

RPGs are bad? There is something wrong with your mind, RPGs are the the only types of games that actually played out right in my opinion. And for one they do not solely base themselves on story, there are usually a lot of gameplay and graphical hooks there as well. So square Enix has developed some shit lately, that doesn't mean other companies can't try.

And the fact that you actually tried to defend Call of Duty: WaW made me laugh, because even if it was based on real events, the truth is it is still just a waste of money meant to hook people on buying and playing a worthless piece of shit.




Activision is extremely lazy! After buying Quantum of Solace hearing "Oh, it's as good as Goldeneye!" I was thrilled! I stuck it in my PS3 and played it and what sprung to mind is "Hey, this is an awful lot like Call of Duty......." I Had not realised up until the next time i played it who developed it. After letting the intro title play through while i was looking at something on my laptop activision and treyarch popped up. What a waste of £30.....

The worst part is they have the cheeck to use exactly the same engine on a film based game that is so different. It's not modern warfare, it's james Bond. It reeks of COD. The worst part is that when you fall to your death online, the exact same symbol pops up as in COD 4!

In summary, whoever said quantum of solace is as good as goldeneye has a serious lack of knowledge about gaming. Goldeneye rules, even in its Pixelated glory!


And that was exactly my point. Maybe I wouldn't be so sick of CoD if everyone would just make their own games instead of copy everything from Cock of Doody.

[Oyarsa]

Well, say all you want. World at War was a stunning display of authentic events, with great meaning. The way they scripted every thing was high class, and I will never take that away from them. An event that took the lives of about 50 million people doesn't become outdated history after only 60 years. Perhaps try to look past the R1 shooting trigger, and see what battle they actually re-created, and then you might be able to appreciate the effort that went into that.

Also, they merely continue a successful series, which comes as no surprise to me. They won't sit there saying "we've already had 4 best sellers.. it's time for something new". Look at how many Mario and Zelda games we have. Success is milked - always. Yeah, they made the game to sell. Who wouldn't? I bought it, I loved it, and I hope they keep making more games like it.

RPGs aren't bad. I love them. RPGs today are just terrible. There has not been one single good JRPG since DragonQuest 8, in my opinion. All start out fun today, but turn to shit 40 minutes later. I've seen enough spikey-haired heros be the magical chosen one. Xenogears is the pinnacle of videogame RPG creation, yet I most likely won't ever see a game like that again. Why? Because RPGs keep trying to be "new" and "fresh".

The mirror's edge thing was more of a joke. I too support innovation and creativity, at all times. However, we're apparently not ready for that yet if Mirror's Edge is the first thing that is coughed up out of the game-making-machine. But that is my opinion.

Also, Killzone 2 is supposedly heavily influenced by the CoD series, though I'm sure many people here will drool all over that. I am sick of CoD copies myself, but realistically speaking, a good game is a good game, regardless of who it stole from or who's influence it accepted.

[tonzie]

Well, say all you want. World at War was a stunning display of authentic events, with great meaning. The way they scripted every thing was high class, and I will never take that away from them. An event that took the lives of about 50 million people doesn't become outdated history after only 60 years. Perhaps try to look past the R1 shooting trigger, and see what battle they actually re-created, and then you might be able to appreciate the effort that went into that.

Also, they merely continue a successful series, which comes as no surprise to me. They won't sit there saying "we've already had 4 best sellers.. it's time for something new". Look at how many Mario and Zelda games we have. Success is milked - always. Yeah, they made the game to sell. Who wouldn't? I bought it, I loved it, and I hope they keep making more games like it.

RPGs aren't bad. I love them. RPGs today are just terrible. There has not been one single good JRPG since DragonQuest 8, in my opinion. All start out fun today, but turn to shit 40 minutes later. I've seen enough spikey-haired heros be the magical chosen one. Xenogears is the pinnacle of videogame RPG creation, yet I most likely won't ever see a game like that again. Why? Because RPGs keep trying to be "new" and "fresh".

The mirror's edge thing was more of a joke. I too support innovation and creativity, at all times. However, we're apparently not ready for that yet if Mirror's Edge is the first thing that is coughed up out of the game-making-machine. But that is my opinion.

Also, Killzone 2 is supposedly heavily influenced by the CoD series, though I'm sure many people here will drool all over that. I am sick of CoD copies myself, but realistically speaking, a good game is a good game, regardless of who it stole from or who's influence it accepted.

Ok, your opinion about RPGs is a lot clearer haha, and I agree, Xenogears was amazing, and we will probably not see anything like it again any time soon. And yes, you're right about the events of the war and such, and how maybe the dialogue and such was scripted nicely, but the game definitely wasn't So there were some fixes since CoD4, but the game is still glitchy to pieces, it tears my mind apart every time something happens.

As for Killzone 2, I am personally not looking forward to it at all, the first game wasn't even that good and now they're hyping this Call of Duty clone. It definitely is not the game for me.

[Laika]

It's not really a Call of Duty clone now, is it? Killzone was out way before Call of Duty become the prestigious franchise it is now, and Killzone 2 has been in development since forever, first being announced at the 2005 E3! Unless you're calling it a COD1-3 clone, hush,if it were the case, I'd have to slap you on the head for being so stupid.

It's also set in the future, has a very extensive storyline that I spent about an hour reading, suggests a lot of thought was put into it. I'm quite sure it's also from a game engine which was built from the ground up so I guess the only way you could really say it's similar to Call of Duty is the fact that the aim is to shoot the bad guys with your guns.

[tonzie]

It's not really a Call of Duty clone now, is it? Killzone was out way before Call of Duty become the prestigious franchise it is now, and Killzone 2 has been in development since forever, first being announced at the 2005 E3! Unless you're calling it a COD1-3 clone, hush,if it were the case, I'd have to slap you on the head for being so stupid.

It's also set in the future, has a very extensive storyline that I spent about an hour reading, suggests a lot of thought was put into it. I'm quite sure it's also from a game engine which was built from the ground up so I guess the only way you could really say it's similar to Call of Duty is the fact that the aim is to shoot the bad guys with your guns.

Yes, it has been around for a while, but engines in development can change lol. The engine has been totally changed since the original Killzone, and the developers have even admitted that they were trying to make Killzone 2 a LOT like CoD.

A prime example of selling out.

Although the story is deep, that is because it is based on a cannon, one which has been around for years now, but a clone is still a clone.

EDIT: What I forgot to say was, I'm not totally hating on this game, it could turn out good, it just looks to me like it might not.

[aztec_god]

There is one game no 2 that are i guess educational. Brain challenge and go suduko. Only ones i know of but yeah games now days have gotten pretty violent. Dead space for instant or R2 body partes everywere! Hehehe:shocked2:

[tonzie]

There is one game no 2 that are i guess educational. Brain challenge and go suduko. Only ones i know of but yeah games now days have gotten pretty violent. Dead space for instant or R2 body partes everywere! Hehehe:shocked2:

Lol yeah, violence is also a big thing with games today. Games don't need to be hardcore violent to be playable, but it sells. It's stupid.

[Laika]

People play games for escapism, most people don't have much violence in their lives and so, it's 'exciting' to experience it on some level.

[Nirvlime]

It sucks, that's what.


Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty: World at War, and every other generic money grabbing game out there are some prime examples.

These games aren't good, not in the least. They are meant to hook mindless young audience members into spending millions of dollars and hours doing the EXACT SAME THING.

There is no innovation there, there is no fun in that, there is no evolution in gaming.
Not only that, but every game out there is striving to be like Call of Duty, because "is sooh 1337" and it "defines the new age of gaming"

F*** that, it's a bunch of the same old boring shit gathered into a big cesspool.

One of the things that made me realize this was Resistance 2. It's predecessor was amazing, innovative, and damn fun, even for a generic boring ol' first person shooter. But then look at its sequel. Resistance 2 took so many features from Call of Duty, even the health system was revised. Yes, maybe they tried to incorporate it into the story, but it's still noticeable. Everything from the way weapons are carried to your melee attack was changed, and now resembles something like big piece of poo in the war.

This thread isn't just meant to bash Call of Doody, (although it is one of the prime examples of pieces of poop out there) It's meant to ask you a question.

What are you seeing in games right now? Do you want to keep ssing the same old boring First Person Shooter come out over and over? Or do you want to see some variation? Lets see some classic style RPGs, give us another Final Fantasy VII, or better yet, CHRONO TRIGGER!

When I say I want there to be some variation, I don't mean I just want more genres either. I want GOOD games to come out, games that are worth buying because of their enthralling, time eating, memorizing stories, or their beautiful art direction that's capable of grabbing your mind and throwing it into the world along with the main protagonists.

Yes, there have been some different games out there lately, but they have been bad different and not good different, not in the least. So give those Cawl uf Doody like clones some good competition, and show them what the thinking mans game can bring to the table.

Lol what a rant and now it's over.

What? FPS have only gotten better...Do you not remember DOOM, HERETIC, Medal of Honor? They were so basic. I'm glad they've started to get rid of health bars.

And Chrono Trigger? REALLY?! I mean...I loved that game. But it has the most basic, childish, storyline ever.

My friend, I feel you try too hard to hate what's popular. If you don't like it - don't buy it. You'll live to see another day =]

[tonzie]

What? FPS have only gotten better...Do you not remember DOOM, HERETIC, Medal of Honor? They were so basic. I'm glad they've started to get rid of health bars.

And Chrono Trigger? REALLY?! I mean...I loved that game. But it has the most basic, childish, storyline ever.

My friend, I feel you try too hard to hate what's popular. If you don't like it - don't buy it. You'll live to see another day =]

Lol wow, you think that's my problem?
Yes, FPSs have gotten better, I wasn't arguing that.
But to model every other game after one? Fuck that, it's called selling out.
And Chrono Trigger had a childish basic storyline?
Hmmm, lets see.. "World war two was bloody, and a lot of people died."
How much more basic can you get? Chrono Trigger had an in depth story, un like your good friend Cock of Doody. No offense, but do some research. :P

By the way, I happen to own Call of Duty:WaW, I owned CoD4 too, but sold it. I play it, sometimes, with friends. I just hate how it is now the center of the universe in the gaming industry. Ticks me off a bit.

[Oyarsa]

You actually compare the storyline of a Roleplaying Game to that of an on-rails shooter that shows real past events...? Even if this comparison becomes legit some day, I'd still say going back in time 60 years to fight the German Wehrmacht and end the greatest war ever is more epic than going back in time 1000 years to fight an over sized porcupine.

Modeling ones game to another is not selling out. It's called not changing a winning formula. Life is based on looking up to elements and striving to be just like them. A world of ideals and role models.

[PandaPanic!]

Gaming today is the future and it's bringing a lot of new technologys out which is a great thing to be happening :D I think Sony is going to try and go down the MMORPG route and the SOE (Sony Online Entertianment) website also suggests this and i think the PS3 would be great for a MMORPG because you can easily use a keyboard and mouse or the controller and talk like you can in LBP then i think it will be a great addition to Sonys current games catalogue.

[tonzie]

You actually compare the storyline of a Roleplaying Game to that of an on-rails shooter that shows real past events...? Even if this comparison becomes legit some day, I'd still say going back in time 60 years to fight the German Wehrmacht and end the greatest war ever is more epic than going back in time 1000 years to fight an over sized porcupine.

Modeling ones game to another is not selling out. It's called not changing a winning formula. Life is based on looking up to elements and striving to be just like them. A world of ideals and role models.

Your right, to an extent. But when every aspect of gameplay is the same, that is selling out. Sure, copy a few features, but to copy every single feature with hopes of your game selling that many more copies? Please, you can't tell me that the developer is doing that in the interest of the player.

And yes, I compared CoD:WaWs story to Chrono Trigger, in my opinion Chrono Trigger's is better. If that offends anyone, I'm sorry, but it's how I feel. Yes WWII actually happened, but it's in the past now. Yes I respect anyone who took part in it, but it's not a worthy game story anymore, it's so overplayed and just boring now. Call me fantasy loving, but I would choose an unrealistic, time-traveling story over trenches and attack dogs any day.



Gaming today is the future and it's bringing a lot of new technologys out which is a great thing to be happening :D I think Sony is going to try and go down the MMORPG route and the SOE (Sony Online Entertianment) website also suggests this and i think the PS3 would be great for a MMORPG because you can easily use a keyboard and mouse or the controller and talk like you can in LBP then i think it will be a great addition to Sonys current games catalogue.


I agree, and about the MMORPG thing, I think it would be a very smart idea on SOE's behalf. If only we can see one soon hahahhaa maybe my opinion on gaming's direction would change, but for now, it stays the same.

[Glericus]

heh, im jumping in to a mid discussion :P but isnt that a bit like compare apple with pears?
Really weird that you compare one of the best RPG of all time to a new FPS game.

[liambonner]

I have never seen so much ranting in my life:P

[Myx23]

Yeah, i feel like ranting, too:

Today's developpers are not ready to walk the extra mile.
Mirror's Edge could have been good, like all the other mediocre crap out there.
Today it's rush rush rush, push push push, pull pull pull. Players or buyers have to play betatesters because of marketing-schedules that cannot be broken..

There are still developpers out there who know what it means to create a fantastic gaming experience. But you could count them with one hand, missing three fingers.

So many games with huge potencial are doomed to flop because "it has to be released. now."

On the one hand it is nice to see that with new concepts even gramma an grampa get the hang of videogaming (Wii) but then... everything gets watered down. The casual wave from Big N is pushing over to PS3 and the other one. This is not the best thing in my opinion.

Oh yeah, and big thanks to Micky$oft, too: Instead of putting their "hard earned" money from XBL into research for new and fresh game concepts, they instead throw all their money to buy some exclusivity for a few months preventing other plattforms to evolve like they should. Every game has the Micky console as the lead-plattform although the games would look sooo much better if it was vice versa.

[Richie]

If I recall correctly the lead development for Burnout Paradise was on PS3. But it's a rare case.

I'm not going to get involved in this convo, otherwise I'll write way too much, hurt my hands, break my keyboard or bore you all to death, or all 3 :S

[ardjoe]

No where near 'every game' has xbox as there lead-platform. Not at all.

[Laika]

Yes I respect anyone who took part in it, but it's not a worthy game story anymore, it's so overplayed and just boring now. Call me fantasy loving, but I would choose an unrealistic, time-traveling story over trenches and attack dogs any day.


I have to disagree with you there, mainly because most games World War 2 games are solely based around America's greatest moment ever, which I agree, shouldn't be the premise of a game. However, I can't really say I've ever played a World War 2 game that has really, really shown the horrors of war to their true extent sure, the overriding theme of most 'war' games, ironically enough, if that war is bad. But bad doesn't quite cut it, games have the power to be both compelling and educational, as all too often we forget how horrific war can really be.

[blake_]

gameing is ment to be fun

[tonzie]

gameing is ment to be fun

LMFAO
I love you, I really do. If only everyone was in this state of mind.
Simple, yet to the EXACT point.




Yeah, i feel like ranting, too:

Today's developpers are not ready to walk the extra mile.
Mirror's Edge could have been good, like all the other mediocre crap out there.
Today it's rush rush rush, push push push, pull pull pull. Players or buyers have to play betatesters because of marketing-schedules that cannot be broken..

There are still developpers out there who know what it means to create a fantastic gaming experience. But you could count them with one hand, missing three fingers.

So many games with huge potencial are doomed to flop because "it has to be released. now."

On the one hand it is nice to see that with new concepts even gramma an grampa get the hang of videogaming (Wii) but then... everything gets watered down. The casual wave from Big N is pushing over to PS3 and the other one. This is not the best thing in my opinion.

Oh yeah, and big thanks to Micky$oft, too: Instead of putting their "hard earned" money from XBL into research for new and fresh game concepts, they instead throw all their money to buy some exclusivity for a few months preventing other plattforms to evolve like they should. Every game has the Micky console as the lead-plattform although the games would look sooo much better if it was vice versa.

And I agree, and Microsoft is probably a key factor in gaming going to shit, but Sony is as well, just not as much. (Please don't hurt me, I love Sony to death.) It is these big companies that rush developers, like you said, but whatever sells is still the main factor in it.

[Fleech]

And I agree, and Microsoft is probably a key factor in gaming going to shit, but Sony is as well, just not as much.

Can we please stop with these sort of comments? Neither company is whiter than white, neither will avoid doing whatever they can to rake in more sales, and neither is in the gaming market just to please us. As has already been said, you can't blame businesses for acting like businesses, especially in such a huge market.

As for developers rushing things out - you'd be better off blaming the publishers. This isn't a new thing of course, but I would agree that it's getting worse. Increasing costs means more pressure to release as early as possible, and with consoles now fully online devs and publishers feel they can get away with sending a game out unfinished knowing they can just patch it to fix any major bugs. Bloody annoying.

[liambonner]

I wish there more platforming games like jack and daxter and ratchet and clank beacase there my favourite sort of games. But beacase alot of people see anything that doesent have at least 15+ age rating kiddy. If they actually tryed the game insted of just playing a load of fps there would be more.

[Andy]

You know Liam I actually agree with you.

[Iseik]

And the fact that you actually tried to defend Call of Duty: WaW made me laugh, because even if it was based on real events, the truth is it is still just a waste of money meant to hook people on buying and playing a worthless piece of shit.


I wouldn't say it's worthless i do not think its that bad of a game, it's just like you said alot of games try to imitate COD which then takes away what it good about call of duty. Yes it's mindless with no real story but somtimes it is fun to play a game like that. I hope, like you that there will be many more new and fresh are games made that will have us on the edge of our seats because of the epic storyline. We can only wait and see but i think with the release of games such as LBP and Mirror's edge, it shows that developers do still want to make new great games, not just plain copys of COD with a different sticker stuck on the front.

[tonzie]

Can we please stop with these sort of comments? Neither company is whiter than white, neither will avoid doing whatever they can to rake in more sales, and neither is in the gaming market just to please us. As has already been said, you can't blame businesses for acting like businesses, especially in such a huge market.

As for developers rushing things out - you'd be better off blaming the publishers. This isn't a new thing of course, but I would agree that it's getting worse. Increasing costs means more pressure to release as early as possible, and with consoles now fully online devs and publishers feel they can get away with sending a game out unfinished knowing they can just patch it to fix any major bugs. Bloody annoying.

You can't say that. Sony is more about quality than M$. Microsoft just buys companies out, then they sell (PUSH is more like it) the product until they have made all the income they can make out of it. They don't care about quality, look at Vista. (lolol)

Support your argument and maybe I'll listen, but as of now I say you're dead wrong.

[Fleech]

You can't say that. Sony is more about quality than M$. Microsoft just buys companies out, then they sell (PUSH is more like it) the product until they have made all the income they can make out of it. They don't care about quality, look at Vista. (lolol)

Support your argument and maybe I'll listen, but as of now I say you're dead wrong.

Support yours and I'll do the same.

[Laika]

Fleech Tonzie, both of what your saying is really based on opinion, little to back it up, that's what's so great about free speech :P In fact, most of this thread is, so either make up or... Fight to the death!

[tonzie]

Fleech Tonzie, both of what your saying is really based on opinion, little to back it up, that's what's so great about free speech :P In fact, most of this thread is, so either make up or... Fight to the death!

Well spoken.

Fleech, I love you man, forgive me?

But honestly, Sony > M$
lmao

[Oyarsa]

Back in the Nintendo days, the same forum discussions went about calling Sony the destroyer of all videogames because they introduced the PS1, and "stole" Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc. Now, just because Sony has fans, they are suddenly the Holy Riders of White Horses, whereas Microsoft is the bringer of all evil. Funny enough, on 360 forums, fanboys claim the exact opposite. Fanboy-ism creates ignorance, and this thread proves just that.

Microsoft is not making gaming go down the drain, at all. In fact, with millions of Xbox360s being sold worldwide, I think they're contributing to the "gaming scene". Microsoft makes a good console, produces awesome games, and Vista Ultimate is not a bad OS. It's just fashionable to call it bad, but updates happen, and things are long since fixed. Let's not forget how Windows 2000 and XP (with pack 2+) are rock solid.

Again, I know Microsoft hating is fashionable, almost as bad as hating the US is, but really, think. Sony and Microsoft are both in it for the same thing, both care only about money and both do NOT care about you. Sony has proven this in the past with scandals, and Microsoft has as well. Philanthropy in economics is a phenomenon of fiction, and definitely not an element of multi-billion dollar business. All in all, every company mentioned in this thread has contributed to the digital age, yet they all did it for money.

I can assure you that Microsoft cares about quality just as much as Sony does. I know that some of you are die-hard Sony fanboys for absolutely no reason other than to cheer for some business that cares little about your existence, but try to be a fan of "gaming" instead. You'll see that the 360 has just as many amazing and just as many shitty games as the PS3 does.

[tricky92]

i dont mind call of duty series but it does start to get boring but for multiplayer i think its unbeatable! i thought cod4 was innovative with the introduction of modern warfare but i do agree that all games seem to be going the same way

[Fleech]

Well spoken.

Fleech, I love you man, forgive me?

But honestly, Sony > M$
lmao

Forgive you? I want a fight to the death! :devilish:

I'm happy to leave the issue alone, although before I do I'll just say that I agree with Oyarsa. Good post.

[ugabugaz]

Alright now heres my opinion on the matter.

Microsoft are greedy. Nintendo are shitty.

Now read here. Microsoft is possible the most money hungry corporation out there, i mean you pay $50 for live and yet you still see a sh!t load of ads. PSN is free and there are NO ads, especially not on the XMB. Now for games. Microsoft has very little in terms on exclusive games or studios (Gears is not exclusive) and they treat the ones they have like crap, see bungie, etc. Now i don't hate Microsoft because its fashionable, no. I hate them because of their disrespectfully policies towards the consumer and the craptastic console they made.

If you look at Sony, you'll see what a console company should be like. Not only is the PS3 the cheapest console in terms of features but it also doesn't die every year. Just please see how much an xbox would cost if it had every PS3 feature. The xbox is like a black and white tv compared to a plasma (PS3). Also Sony treat their studios with respect, just look at Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Kojima (all of them are 3rd party yet they make games exclusive to the PS3). Not only are Sony good towards their studios but they actually own like 20 or so. So please, next time look at all the facts before saying "hating Microsoft is fashionable". Oh and lets not forget the original Xbox. Remember how Microsoft dumped all of their fans? how they just discontinued it? Now just take a look at the PS2, its still going strong. No wonder people hate Microsoft.

Nintendo is a whole different story. I don't consider the Wii a gaming system, more of a gimmick than anything else. Kinda like buying a mono soundtrack of a crappy movie.

The PlayStation is the best console, period. Sony is the best overall console company.

[Laika]

Alright now heres my opinion on the matter.

Microsoft are greedy. Nintendo are shitty.

Now read here. Microsoft is possible the most money hungry corporation out there, i mean you pay $50 for live and yet you still see a sh!t load of ads. PSN is free and there are NO ads, especially not on the XMB. Now for games. Microsoft has very little in terms on exclusive games or studios (Gears is not exclusive) and they treat the ones they have like crap, see bungie, etc. Now i don't hate Microsoft because its fashionable, no. I hate them because of their disrespectfully policies towards the consumer and the craptastic console they made.

If you look at Sony, you'll see what a console company should be like. Not only is the PS3 the cheapest console in terms of features but it also doesn't die every year. Just please see how much an xbox would cost if it had every PS3 feature. The xbox is like a black and white tv compared to a plasma (PS3). Also Sony treat their studios with respect, just look at Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Kojima (all of them are 3rd party yet they make games exclusive to the PS3). Not only are Sony good towards their studios but they actually own like 20 or so. So please, next time look at all the facts before saying "hating Microsoft is fashionable". Oh and lets not forget the original Xbox. Remember how Microsoft dumped all of their fans? how they just discontinued it? Now just take a look at the PS2, its still going strong. No wonder people hate Microsoft.

Nintendo is a whole different story. I don't consider the Wii a gaming system, more of a gimmick than anything else. Kinda like buying a mono soundtrack of a crappy movie.

The PlayStation is the best console, period. Sony is the best overall console company.

I think you just broke my 'I'm-not-a-fanboy-BUT...'dar. Personally I don't believe they're greedy, especially in a Capitalist world, greedy doesn't really exist. If anything, they're smart, from a purely business perspective. Very little in terms of exclusives? Are you shitting me? Fallout 3 DLC? GTA IV DLC? Various 2009 titles, personally I count timed-exclusives as exclusives, Bioshock was and always will be a 360 game. Not to mention the previously-Playstation exclusives that are now multi-platform, smart moves by the developers, in my book.

The PS3 may be a better console in terms of functionality, but as a company, Sony have some serious catching up to do. They're in debt by around $1 billion, the publicity for the PS3 is virtually zero. Compare that to Microsoft, I dare you.

Ever heard of a fallacious argument, usually one which is based solely on opinion and whimsical thoughts?

[ugabugaz]

I think you just broke my 'I'm-not-a-fanboy-BUT...'dar. Personally I don't believe they're greedy, especially in a Capitalist world, greedy doesn't really exist. If anything, they're smart, from a purely business perspective. Very little in terms of exclusives? Are you shitting me? Fallout 3 DLC? GTA IV DLC? Various 2009 titles, personally I count timed-exclusives as exclusives, Bioshock was and always will be a 360 game. Not to mention the previously-Playstation exclusives that are now multi-platform, smart moves by the developers, in my book.

The PS3 may be a better console in terms of functionality, but as a company, Sony have some serious catching up to do. They're in debt by around $1 billion, the publicity for the PS3 is virtually zero. Compare that to Microsoft, I dare you.

Ever heard of a fallacious argument, usually one which is based solely on opinion and whimsical thoughts?
To me an exclusive game means it always stays on the same console. No DLC doesn't count. The only thing that Microsoft can do is just spend a lot of money and pay their way. It's a bad tactic, and you'll never see games like Killzone 2 that way.

[tonzie]

Forgive you? I want a fight to the death! :devilish:

I'm happy to leave the issue alone, although before I do I'll just say that I agree with Oyarsa. Good post.

Fine, you're on!
What games do you have that include online and killing? ;)



Alright now heres my opinion on the matter.

Microsoft are greedy. Nintendo are shitty.

Now read here. Microsoft is possible the most money hungry corporation out there, i mean you pay $50 for live and yet you still see a sh!t load of ads. PSN is free and there are NO ads, especially not on the XMB. Now for games. Microsoft has very little in terms on exclusive games or studios (Gears is not exclusive) and they treat the ones they have like crap, see bungie, etc. Now i don't hate Microsoft because its fashionable, no. I hate them because of their disrespectfully policies towards the consumer and the craptastic console they made.

If you look at Sony, you'll see what a console company should be like. Not only is the PS3 the cheapest console in terms of features but it also doesn't die every year. Just please see how much an xbox would cost if it had every PS3 feature. The xbox is like a black and white tv compared to a plasma (PS3). Also Sony treat their studios with respect, just look at Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Kojima (all of them are 3rd party yet they make games exclusive to the PS3). Not only are Sony good towards their studios but they actually own like 20 or so. So please, next time look at all the facts before saying "hating Microsoft is fashionable". Oh and lets not forget the original Xbox. Remember how Microsoft dumped all of their fans? how they just discontinued it? Now just take a look at the PS2, its still going strong. No wonder people hate Microsoft.

Nintendo is a whole different story. I don't consider the Wii a gaming system, more of a gimmick than anything else. Kinda like buying a mono soundtrack of a crappy movie.

The PlayStation is the best console, period. Sony is the best overall console company.

THANK YOU, I was just going to say something stating that I don't hate Microsoft because it's fashionable. That's literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard Oyarsa. But in fact, I hate them because yes they suck, period. For one, saying the Xbox 360 is an Okay console is an exaggeration, seeing as they break at least twice a year (usually) Then microsoft actually has the nerve to charge you money ($100-150 American) to get it fixed, even if it's a software issue. Yes Sony does the same, but PS3s are much more reliable and have a longer Usage Life, they wont break after 3 months (of even the most HARDCORE gaming)

And like ugabugaz said: Sony treats the developers who are exclusive to them with respect, while Microsoft does not, not in the least. I think you're the one who thinks Arguing with the norm is fashionable, give me a break.

[Laika]

Fine, you're on!
What games do you have that include online and killing? ;)




THANK YOU, I was just going to say something stating that I don't hate Microsoft because it's fashionable. That's literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard Oyarsa. But in fact, I hate them because yes they suck, period. For one, saying the Xbox 360 is an Okay console is an exaggeration, seeing as they break at least twice a year (usually) Then microsoft actually has the nerve to charge you money ($100-150 American) to get it fixed, even if it's a software issue. Yes Sony does the same, but PS3s are much more reliable and have a longer Usage Life, they wont break after 3 months (of even the most HARDCORE gaming)

And like ugabugaz said: Sony treats the developers who are exclusive to them with respect, while Microsoft does not, not in the least. I think you're the one who thinks Arguing with the norm is fashionable, give me a break.

So PS3's WON'T break after 3 months you say? So I guess the fact that my one broke after one didn't happen, I imagined it, or did some 360 fanboy sabotage it? However, you can't argue with the statistics, more 360's break than PS3's do, although certain batches of the now discontinued 60gb had blue-ray diode issues, with them burning out monumentally quickly.

[tonzie]

So PS3's WON'T break after 3 months you say? So I guess the fact that my one broke after one didn't happen, I imagined it, or did some 360 fanboy sabotage it? However, you can't argue with the statistics, more 360's break than PS3's do, although certain batches of the now discontinued 60gb had blue-ray diode issues, with them burning out monumentally quickly.

Haha of course they did, a lot of first version consoles have problems, but what I'm saying is the fact that the 360 is still having problems like that, while the PS3 is not.

Do I also need to point out that it should be vice versa seeing as the 360 has been out longer, thus giving microsoft more time to address the issue?

[ugabugaz]

The Playstation should theoretically break more often than the 360, wanna know why? Because all the technology inside is pretty much new!
-Cell Processor
-Blu Ray Drive
-XDR Ram
-RSX (Maybe)

What new and unavailable technologies does the Xbox 360 have? Everything was pretty much available at the time. Yet somehow it breaks alot more often than the PS3, it just doesn't add up.

[Lorcan!]

I get flamed for this whenever I say it, but I really do hate Microsoft.
They completely rushed this generation and the consoles suffered because of it. RROD? Yeah, it's still hasn't been fixed and so itpossibly wouldn't have been fixed with a little bit of extra development time on the console, but still.
Also, let's look at the PS3. Remember how much was promised of it when it was first unveiled? Well, how much of that did it still retain after it's release?
Sony needed to get it's console out to catch up on the 360 because it was stealing the PS2s fanbase. Had the PS3 been released before the 360, it would have WAY more sales than the 360. Not because it would have been out longer, but because it would have grabbed all those people who think "I want a Next Gen Console!". These people get the ball rolling and people buy what their friends are buying. Infact, I'd say Sony has done incredibly well to regain the numbers it has. Esspecially after the rough start it's had.

Money also dictates everything nowadays. We're seeing less and less exclusives nowadays because simply put, more platforms = more sales.
The massive split down the market also fuels this. Last gen, the consoles were virtually all the same in terms of abilty, but the PS2 had well over half the market and so it was easy for a company to invest soley in PS2 development. It was easier and guarenteed lots of money.
This time round, there are 2 types of consoles. Wii and PS3/360. And to make things even more annoying, the PS3 and 360 are almost half and half with their market share. The 360 does have more sales, but its still pretty close. Much closer than last gen anyway. Not to mention the fact that a good few of the 360s in the sales figures we see don't actually work anymore.
Reguardless, the diference in sales numbers between releasing on 2 or 1 console(s) isn't going to be something you can disregard this gen. It could literally double your sales to develop multi platform. It means it's a little harder to make the game and you can't optimise your game properly due to different console specs, but who cares with all the money you'll get. Also, it's not like you'll get extra marketing and hype by going exclusively with Sony, because they don't market anyway.
And Microsoft are perfectly happy to do this. Soaking up every franchise they can get their hands on.

Games being annoyingly similar is also something we'll have to get more used to.
As the games industry gets bigger, it also gets riskier.
The ammount on offer is growing ridiculously. Look at christmas 08. Look at how many games were out around that period? And look at how many were pushed down and forgotten about because of the bloated shelves. Who got Valkyrie Chronicals? Or even LBP? The internet people have it, and anyone who doesn't have it should, but with all the other heavy hitters around, it preformed well under it's expectations. As did R2.
With so much out, companies want to make sure that what they have out, is what you are going to buy.
Are you going to buy some weird RPG anime world war game? Or Fifa 09?
We've all seen the weird RPG anime's excellent review scores, but the common public haven't. They've seen a weird game and a familiar game and with £50 at stake, they take the familiar option.
It's the same for LBP and Call of Duty. They've all seen the adverts for the cartoony cute sidescroller blowing up the dog, but they want an adult and manly game where you shoot things!

It's sad. But it's true.

[blake_]

this is getting like a proper discussion my opinion is PS3 wipes the ploor with the 360

[tonzie]

I get flamed for this whenever I say it, but I really do hate Microsoft.
They completely rushed this generation and the consoles suffered because of it. RROD? Yeah, it's still hasn't been fixed and so itpossibly wouldn't have been fixed with a little bit of extra development time on the console, but still.
Also, let's look at the PS3. Remember how much was promised of it when it was first unveiled? Well, how much of that did it still retain after it's release?
Sony needed to get it's console out to catch up on the 360 because it was stealing the PS2s fanbase. Had the PS3 been released before the 360, it would have WAY more sales than the 360. Not because it would have been out longer, but because it would have grabbed all those people who think "I want a Next Gen Console!". These people get the ball rolling and people buy what their friends are buying. Infact, I'd say Sony has done incredibly well to regain the numbers it has. Esspecially after the rough start it's had.

Money also dictates everything nowadays. We're seeing less and less exclusives nowadays because simply put, more platforms = more sales.
The massive split down the market also fuels this. Last gen, the consoles were virtually all the same in terms of abilty, but the PS2 had well over half the market and so it was easy for a company to invest soley in PS2 development. It was easier and guarenteed lots of money.
This time round, there are 2 types of consoles. Wii and PS3/360. And to make things even more annoying, the PS3 and 360 are almost half and half with their market share. The 360 does have more sales, but its still pretty close. Much closer than last gen anyway. Not to mention the fact that a good few of the 360s in the sales figures we see don't actually work anymore.
Reguardless, the diference in sales numbers between releasing on 2 or 1 console(s) isn't going to be something you can disregard this gen. It could literally double your sales to develop multi platform. It means it's a little harder to make the game and you can't optimise your game properly due to different console specs, but who cares with all the money you'll get. Also, it's not like you'll get extra marketing and hype by going exclusively with Sony, because they don't market anyway.
And Microsoft are perfectly happy to do this. Soaking up every franchise they can get their hands on.

Games being annoyingly similar is also something we'll have to get more used to.
As the games industry gets bigger, it also gets riskier.
The ammount on offer is growing ridiculously. Look at christmas 08. Look at how many games were out around that period? And look at how many were pushed down and forgotten about because of the bloated shelves. Who got Valkyrie Chronicals? Or even LBP? The internet people have it, and anyone who doesn't have it should, but with all the other heavy hitters around, it preformed well under it's expectations. As did R2.
With so much out, companies want to make sure that what they have out, is what you are going to buy.
Are you going to buy some weird RPG anime world war game? Or Fifa 09?
We've all seen the weird RPG anime's excellent review scores, but the common public haven't. They've seen a weird game and a familiar game and with £50 at stake, they take the familiar option.
It's the same for LBP and Call of Duty. They've all seen the adverts for the cartoony cute sidescroller blowing up the dog, but they want an adult and manly game where you shoot things!

It's sad. But it's true.



Wow I said something about this before the weekend.. but I guess the server downtime was some sort of rollback?
Damnit I forget what it was exactly that I said, but all I know is I said something about agreeing with you and the developers being treated differently by each company and so forth. Damn I wish I remembered it though


Anyways, just on a side note hahaha:

Me and my friend sat down with two Xbots in my accounting today. My friend and I both own a PS3 and these Xbots.. well, they own Xboxes.
We compared a list of the games exclusive to each console (We even later included the Wii in the list, but it doesn't count ;) )

PS3 won with flying colours, with tons more GOOD exclusive games (We didn't include the bad ones) than the Xbox 360.

End result: The Xbots are now buying PS3s.
Mission accomplished?

[blake_]

yes mission accomplised world domination next?

[tonzie]

I think so ;)

[Lorcan!]

End result: The Xbots are now buying PS3s.
Mission accomplished?

HELL YEAH!
Platinum Trophy for you!

[Oyarsa]

All the arguments made in this thread are subject to opinion and preference. None of them are concrete and form a true factual standpoint.

The 360 has more preferred exclusives to some, and to some the PS3 has more. Review scores have nothing to do with anything. It's the person-in-question's personal preference in gaming. To some, the Wii has the most enjoyable exclusives. Big deal? No. Is this hindering your personal enjoyment of your preferred console? No. Stop acting like this is some holy war of consoles, and just either buy all of them and realize they all have their strengths and weaknesses, or shut the fuck up about it already. Fanboy-ism is disgusting on all fronts.

Sony and Microsoft are both equally bad in the ethics department, so don't blame Microsoft for being the smarter business this generation. They didn't kill gaming at all - they simply launched the console earlier and won over a ton of fans. VERY smart move. Launched a highly compatible LIVE server for online gaming - something that was rapidly increasing in popularity. Another excellent move. Yes, you have to pay for it every year. People do it, don't they? Business perspective; smart move.

Not only that, the 360 was always replaced for free, shipped within a very fast time, when it broke down. Unless you were out of warranty, then you have to pay. Like every other electronics company will make you do. It's not Microsoft's exclusive policy. It's called electronics. Sony is the exact same. Not only that, for the $100 dollars you still get fast shipping, and Microsoft extends your warranty. Most electronic companies won't even take your broken crap back if it's out of warranty, and they will definitely not further assist you with it after you paid for repairs.

Today's 360s don't have the failure rate people seem to nag about. I've had mine for years, and it never once broke down. Saying the 360 does nothing but break is a Sony fanboy's overused argument, much like the 360's retarded argument saying the PS3 has no games. Time goes on; this isn't 2006.

Both the PS3 and the 360 are excellent consoles. Saying the 360 is garbage and is killing gaming echos mute tones on the instrument of sense, and is nothing but a fanboy crying over things he has no understanding of. Look at statistics, sales and userbase. The 360 stands strong, very strong. These are not the numbers of a crap console. Microsoft and Sony both are propelling gaming to levels we never even dreamed of back in the 90's, so stop whining and moaning.

You want to know what's killing gaming today? Fanboys. They destroy gaming. Not the companies. They just do normal business like they have been for years and years. It's people starting ridiculous arguments over which console "wins" over the other. If you enjoy the console you purchased, the console won. I bought both the 360 and PS3, and I'm enjoying them both. Seems like a tie to me.

[tonzie]

All the arguments made in this thread are subject to opinion and preference. None of them are concrete and form a true factual standpoint.

The 360 has more preferred exclusives to some, and to some the PS3 has more. Review scores have nothing to do with anything. It's the person-in-question's personal preference in gaming. To some, the Wii has the most enjoyable exclusives. Big deal? No. Is this hindering your personal enjoyment of your preferred console? No. Stop acting like this is some holy war of consoles, and just either buy all of them and realize they all have their strengths and weaknesses, or shut the fuck up about it already. Fanboy-ism is disgusting on all fronts.

Sony and Microsoft are both equally bad in the ethics department, so don't blame Microsoft for being the smarter business this generation. They didn't kill gaming at all - they simply launched the console earlier and won over a ton of fans. VERY smart move. Launched a highly compatible LIVE server for online gaming - something that was rapidly increasing in popularity. Another excellent move. Yes, you have to pay for it every year. People do it, don't they? Business perspective; smart move.

Not only that, the 360 was always replaced for free, shipped within a very fast time, when it broke down. Unless you were out of warranty, then you have to pay. Like every other electronics company will make you do. It's not Microsoft's exclusive policy. It's called electronics. Sony is the exact same. Not only that, for the $100 dollars you still get fast shipping, and Microsoft extends your warranty. Most electronic companies won't even take your broken crap back if it's out of warranty, and they will definitely not further assist you with it after you paid for repairs.

Today's 360s don't have the failure rate people seem to nag about. I've had mine for years, and it never once broke down. Saying the 360 does nothing but break is a Sony fanboy's overused argument, much like the 360's retarded argument saying the PS3 has no games. Time goes on; this isn't 2006.

Both the PS3 and the 360 are excellent consoles. Saying the 360 is garbage and is killing gaming echos mute tones on the instrument of sense, and is nothing but a fanboy crying over things he has no understanding of. Look at statistics, sales and userbase. The 360 stands strong, very strong. These are not the numbers of a crap console. Microsoft and Sony both are propelling gaming to levels we never even dreamed of back in the 90's, so stop whining and moaning.

You want to know what's killing gaming today? Fanboys. They destroy gaming. Not the companies. They just do normal business like they have been for years and years. It's people starting ridiculous arguments over which console "wins" over the other. If you enjoy the console you purchased, the console won. I bought both the 360 and PS3, and I'm enjoying them both. Seems like a tie to me.


About the exclusives, you're wrong. Me and these three other people. (Two per argumentative side.) sat down and compared, and Sony owns almost more than double the amount of exclusives. Just proving a point.

As for these Numbers you speak of, having to do with warranty, yes, it is something every company does, but when a company issues a warranty and KNOWS that their console will break, in a small time period, that is wrong. I'm pretty sure this site has an article about that somewhere, and if not I'm sure IGN does. And the thing is, nothing has been done to fix that. While on the other hand, certain console developers have taken the time for research and the money for repairs that would insure that their console was reliable and stable. You can not argue that the companies developing these consoles are the same, because they are not, not in the least.

And about your Xbox not breaking, good for you. It happens to the majority whether you like to admit it or not.

One more thing, talking about Fanboys.
If you think I am one, then you are wrong. I was actually intending on getting a 360, but after looking into not only the specs, but the reviews, reliability, user comments, and games, I chose PS3. So don't go assuming and pinning names on people. I do not like the Xbox 360 one bit because of it's maker and just because of how much it sucks compared to the PS3, quality wise, performance wise, and just plain logically.

[Oyarsa]

Good exclusives is a point of perspective - something you simply can't seem to drill into your skull. So is the entire console war. I don't care if 5 of your friends somehow calculate which console has the better exclusives. Someone across the street might think the exact opposite. There's people that loathe Uncharted, Metal Gear Solid 4 and LittleBigPlanet, while loving Mass Effect, Dead Rising and Gears of War. Are they ignorant idiots, or simply people with opinions that don't mirror someone else's?

The 360 has made MILLIONS and MILLIONS of people satisfied, more than the PS3 even, so saying the 360 sucks isn't logical, no. It's an opinion. There's plenty of people that swear on the 360 because they are fans of it, just like you are a fan of Sony. To each his own. You can prefer a console, and that's perfectly normal. But saying the other one is complete shit is just a pure natural form of ignorance. Saying you don't have any interest in it is a whole different approach; one that hasn't been taken yet.

I didn't mention any names when using the word fanboy, meaning it only applies to those that feel addressed, making it a self-diagnosis. Looking at all your replies in this thread, I would most definitely pin "fanboy" all over you, but again, a matter of opinion and personal judgmental perspective. No facts, just opinion. Remember that phenomenon and apply it to the entire console war.

Fanboys generally are unable to look outside the box and see the bigger picture, blinded by the love for their purchase. Perhaps a validation of said purchase or something, I don't know. Either way, both the 360 and the PS3 have their strength and weaknesses, and that's a stupid rock solid fact. There's nothing you can bring to disprove that.

The 360 sucks performance wise versus the PS3? No, it does not. In fact, it's almost exactly equal, depending completely on the game and developer. They are two extremely powerful machines, both going in different directions. The PS3's cell is stronger, whereas the 360 GPU is stronger. It's differences that, in the end, don't make the two very different at all. It's just different infrastructures. Not to mention the coding difficulty of the PS3, which bottlenecks it to no end, together with the 2x BR-ROM reader.

Microsoft just published the 360. It's made by companies that also worked on the PS3's Cell, IBM, ATI, Samsung, etc. All people you buy things from on a daily basis. The same guys that made the failing GPU chip for the early 360 models make the GFX in most computers, and even the Gamecube, etc. Don't pin it all on Microsoft - they just made the better business choices.

[Laika]

As for these Numbers you speak of, having to do with warranty, yes, it is something every company does, but when a company issues a warranty and KNOWS that their console will break, in a small time period, that is wrong.

You're an idiot, to say that Microsoft are actively trying to screw people over without a shred of proof. Yet again more opinion and conjecture dressed up as fact.



And about your Xbox not breaking, good for you. It happens to the majority whether you like to admit it or not.

Get off your high horse, stop talking this absolutely nonsense. It's not the MAJORITY, you fucking idiot, it's a frighteningly high amount, but it's something like 2%, in business terms is quite high, but it by no means a majority. A majority is generally something above 50%, in case you didn't realise.


One more thing, talking about Fanboys.
If you think I am one, then you are wrong. I was actually intending on getting a 360, but after looking into not only the specs, but the reviews, reliability, user comments, and games, I chose PS3. So don't go assuming and pinning names on people. I do not like the Xbox 360 one bit because of it's maker and just because of how much it sucks compared to the PS3, quality wise, performance wise, and just plain logically.

Nobody is a fanboy before they purchase a product, it doesn't work like that. It's through buying a console, having a couple of insecurities about your purchase, and then arguing that yours is the best, to the death, until the fabric of time changes, crowning your console the best.

Like I said, high horse. Off.

[tonzie]

Good exclusives is a point of perspective - something you simply can't seem to drill into your skull. So is the entire console war. I don't care if 5 of your friends somehow calculate which console has the better exclusives. Someone across the street might think the exact opposite. There's people that loathe Uncharted, Metal Gear Solid 4 and LittleBigPlanet, while loving Mass Effect, Dead Rising and Gears of War. Are they ignorant idiots, or simply people with opinions that don't mirror someone else's....

I think you got me wrong with the exclusive list thing. We sat down and wrote all the ones we could think of that were decent to play, not the GOOD ones in my opinion. We all said at least one game where everyone else in the group replied with a form of disgust of some sort. By this, I mean we wrote down every exclusive that wasn't a joke game or a complete waste of money.

As for the whole equality thing, prove to me that they are equal. Lets not include games here seeing as that sparked your disagreement last time.
PS3 has more processing power, period. The Xbox 360 GPU does not even compare, so don't even go out and say that. And you also say that the PS3 is hard to program for? Developers have gotten lazy because since the Xbox was out first, they learned the dev kit for it, and when tie PS3 came out they already knew how to program for the 360. There is no real difficulty, a programing language is a programing language, I would know. Take the switch from cartridge to CD-ROM, now THAT would have been a hard thing to overcome script wise, the cell processors are another form of memory which are really nothing different script wise, other than the fact that you would have to program the location you want to use and the percentage and so on. Please, feel free to try and prove me wrong because you wont, it is in fact something I've looked into.

Now it's your turn, I actually want to see what a person with your opinion thinks about the Xbox. What good qualities does it have that the PS3 doesn't?



Blah blah blah.

As for you, settle down. :P Do you always insult people like that when you have a disagreement? I found an article stating that the 360 developers KNEW that the Xboxes would break, and damage game discs, they admitted to it. I didn't say they did it on purpose, but to let that go uncared for, making a lot of people have to pay more money just to get them fixed and such, that is a money grubbing corporation at it's finest, and greediest.


Blah blah blah NOT MAJORITY.

And in fact, it is not 2%, that is a lie or a miscalculation, so get your facts straight. The media in is in fact saying that it is 16% of xboxs that break, whichis a lot, but I STILL think is bogus, seeing as more than half the population of Xbots from my school have had or currently own one that is broken. (Yes, within the year too)

I really think you should get off your high horse, the green name doesn't give you the right to insult people like that, and it sure as hell doesn't make your opinion right, so before you go telling people to get their information right, do it yourself.

[Laika]

I retract the 2% statement, claims are around which are more like 30%, which I was previously unaware of, but it's still not a majority. Oh, and the green has nothing to do with it, Fanboys just irritate me straight off. I'd very much like to see this alleged article, I've never heard of it before and intrigues me as, for once, it seems to be a somewhat 'original' fanboy argument.

Money grabbing corporations are what the business is all about, really, I even think that was one of my points, Sony seem to be forgetting that, at least on the PS3 side of things, but not really making up for it in other areas or directly addressing.

And please don't cite your school as 'proof', I only know one person whose 360 has broken, out of about 100 people, not really reflective of the general consensus.

I also liked the use of the quote button, the inclusion of the 'blah's, albeit hilarious, seems like it probably too you longer than just straight-quoting me. Good job.

But no, I'm genuinely interesting in seeing this article.

The 360 beats the PS3 for sheer affordability of your normal man, the PS3 is a very... middle-class console, only the fairly upmarket chaps seem to own it and seems to have this somewhat elitist come nerd-like stigma at my school, doesn't bother me, but I'm also not sure this is necessarily reflective of wider society.

[Fleech]

I know I said I wouldn't get drawn into this again, so sorry, and there's not much I can add that hasn't already been said.

However, the discussion regarding reliability seems pretty pointless to me given the problems that the PS2 had with the infamous Disc Read Error. I don't know the figures and nor do I care what they are, but the problem certainly existed and as such Sony can't be put up on some pedestal over an issue that their own consoles have had problems with in the past.

tonzie, as far as exclusives go as has been said it is all just opinions. If you and your three friends think the PS3 has a better selection then fair enough, but it proves absolutely nothing. Ask a different group of four people and you'll get different opinions on the games you discussed.

As for the power of the two systems - even if the PS3 is potentially more powerful it is totally irrelevant if developers don't then take advantage of it (and if they don't then it is them that deserve your criticism, not Microsoft).

I don't understand all the anger. They're just games consoles. :(

[tonzie]

Long argument hahahaha.

First of all, the thing I did with the quotes wasn't meant to insult, only to shorten the length of the post, so sorry if you took it the wrong way.

Second of all, here is the article.
http://gear.ign.com/articles/939/939372p1.html

I was partially wrong, but that article still proves its point.



About exclusive games.

Once again, I said we were listing ALL the games that were exclusive to each console. (besides joke games, like barbie or stupid stuff like that)
There was no bias or any games thrown off the list because we didn't want them there.

[Oyarsa]

Once again, I said we were listing ALL the games that were exclusive to each console. (besides joke games, like barbie or stupid stuff like that)
There was no bias or any games thrown off the list because we didn't want them there.
There is bias, because opinion is involved. To person A, all your PS3 exclusives can mean absolutely nothing. Saying one console has more exclusives is one thing that can be factual, but that has little to no value whatsoever. Nintendo always has the most exclusives, but nobody cares about them. It's about the quality of said exclusives, and what appeals to you. Hence it becomes an opinion-based argument.

The 16% is a figure drawn from the end of 2007, and beginning of 2008. The elites have a solid reputation, and newly released 360's with HDMI ports are practically the same as PS3s in reliability. Then there's the warranty that comes with it anyway.

Equality? David Shippy, the Chief Architect of the power processing unit for the Cell at IBM, claims that the machines can be seen as equals in different daylights.

"I'm going to have to answer with an 'it depends.' Again, they're completely different models. So in the PS3, you've got this Cell chip which has massive parallel processing power, the PowerPC core, multiple SPU cores… it's got a GPU that is, in the model here, processing more in the Cell chip and less in the GPU. So that's one processing paradigm -- a heterogeneous paradigm."

"With the Xbox 360, you've got more of a traditional multi-core system, and you've got three PowerPC cores, each of them having dual threads -- so you've got six threads running there, at least in the CPU. Six threads in Xbox 360, and eight or nine threads in the PS3 -- but then you've got to factor in the GPU," Shippy explains. "The GPU is highly sophisticated in the Xbox 360."

"At the end of the day, when you put them all together, depending on the software, I think they're pretty equal."

Face it. The 360 is a powerful machine, more than capable of holding its own against Sony's PS3. In fact, it has been holding its own just fine, and I am of firm belief that a competition like this will only benefit gamers in the end. It's much like you getting a better interest rating when two banks compete.

[tonzie]

Face it. The 360 is a powerful machine, more than capable of holding its own against Sony's PS3. In fact, it has been holding its own just fine, and I am of firm belief that a competition like this will only benefit gamers in the end. It's much like you getting a better interest rating when two banks compete.

Then explain to me why the 360 would not have been powerful enough to play MGS4?
And before you say it, no, it didn't only have to do with the amount of discs it would require.

[Nirvlime]

Lol wow, you think that's my problem?
Yes, FPSs have gotten better, I wasn't arguing that.
But to model every other game after one? Fuck that, it's called selling out.
And Chrono Trigger had a childish basic storyline?
Hmmm, lets see.. "World war two was bloody, and a lot of people died."
How much more basic can you get? Chrono Trigger had an in depth story, un like your good friend Cock of Doody. No offense, but do some research. :P

By the way, I happen to own Call of Duty:WaW, I owned CoD4 too, but sold it. I play it, sometimes, with friends. I just hate how it is now the center of the universe in the gaming industry. Ticks me off a bit.

Woah, okay so I had forgotten about this thread. And I know I posted something like a while back - and maybe yall have moved on - but I felt I should respond. Feel free to disregard.

First of all, I loved Chrono Trigger. I played it a bunch as a kid. But if you think the story line was 'deep' - and you're over the age of 15. You're LAME. Enough said on that.

And if you wanna dumb down World War II to "it was bloody and a lot of people died" so be it. But it was a major event in history. You can't expect it to have any deep intricate storyline. If they had added artistic sides to try to make it 'deep' it would've been gay - Did you watch Thin Red Line? It's a WW2 FPS not a Role Playing Game.

And I really don't remember a time when every game was completely different. I mean, there's different types of games; but within each category one game does something good and for the next few years everyone copies it until someone adds something different that catches the public's eye. Evolution maybe? FPS don't seem any more copies of CoD than they were copies of Doom, Goldeneye, Medal of Honor, or Halo back in the day.

If plots and shared ideas are what's bothering you then read a damn book. They tend to be quite different!

[Laika]

Then explain to me why the 360 would not have been powerful enough to play MGS4?
And before you say it, no, it didn't only have to do with the amount of discs it would require.

That is absolute rubbish, there is currently a MGS4 in development for the 360, scheduled for a release around 12-14 months after the PS3 version came out, very much the opposite of what happened to Bioshock.

[ugabugaz]

That is absolute rubbish, there is currently a MGS4 in development for the 360, scheduled for a release around 12-14 months after the PS3 version came out, very much the opposite of what happened to Bioshock.
Won't happen.

[tonzie]

That is absolute rubbish, there is currently a MGS4 in development for the 360, scheduled for a release around 12-14 months after the PS3 version came out, very much the opposite of what happened to Bioshock.

Proof please, that is one of the biggest rumors circulating right now. Kojima doesn't want it on the Xbox, so it wont go on to Xbox.

Couple of the reaons:
1 Would be too big to fit on HD DVDs
2 Uses real time rendered CGI, something that the 360 can't handle
3 Kojima want's it exclusively on PS3, so it will stay exclusive.

[Laika]

Proof please, that is one of the biggest rumors circulating right now. Kojima doesn't want it on the Xbox, so it wont go on to Xbox.

Couple of the reaons:
1 Would be too big to fit on HD DVDs
2 Uses real time rendered CGI, something that the 360 can't handle
3 Kojima want's it exclusively on PS3, so it will stay exclusive.

Proof?! You're asking ME for proof after claiming that the 360 can't handle it, as if it were fact. HD DVD can facilitate 15GB PER LAYER, so you're talking out of your arse, yet again. 360 can't handle it?

Call me old fashioned, but the pot is certainly calling the kettle black here.

Tell you what, fuck it, this is futile, 8 pages of sheer Fanboy-headed crap, and I'm fucking sick of it. Good day to you, and good fucking riddance. I'm through with this thread.

[Transcendence]

I gotta agree with the horde of fanboys that there wont be an MGS4 port to the 360. However i disagree on everything else. Sure the PS3 IS more powerful but you could still run MGS4 on it if ported and compressed correctly.

Stupid arrogant fanboys that wont say a word against their console of choice. I dont like the 360. Mostly because its a Microsoft product but also because i greatly prefer THE GAMES on the PS3. That IS why we buy consoles, right?

Anyway, what im trying to say is that you can admit your wrong about this to protect your reputation and respect from fellow gamers. Be more open-minded and less biased and your opinion shall once again make an impression on the forums.

[tonzie]

I gotta agree with the horde of fanboys that there wont be an MGS4 port to the 360. However i disagree on everything else. Sure the PS3 IS more powerful but you could still run MGS4 on it if ported and compressed correctly.

Stupid arrogant fanboys that wont say a word against their console of choice. I dont like the 360. Mostly because its a Microsoft product but also because i greatly prefer THE GAMES on the PS3. That IS why we buy consoles, right?

Anyway, what im trying to say is that you can admit your wrong about this to protect your reputation and respect from fellow gamers. Be more open-minded and less biased and your opinion shall once again make an impression on the forums.


Yes but the thing is, I'm not talking through my ass with stupid made up information and whatnot. MGS4 would not fit on an HDDVD, and the 360 can not handle it's real time rendering. Now compression is different, yes, but that's making it shittier, which is also another thing Kojima wouldn't allow.

[ugabugaz]

Umm where did HD-DVD come from? The 360 DOES NOT support HD-DVD as a gaming medium. DVD is the only and i mean only disc that can be used. Plus there are so many references and pieces of technology that are sony based it would be too hard to change them. Trust me MGS4 will never come to the 360. There was a rumour circulating a while back but that was disproved.

Currently the only 360 game i would like to have on PS3 is Left 4 Dead.

DVD9 Capacity= 8.54GB
Blu Ray= 25 GB (single layer)
HD-DVD= 15 GB (single layer)

[tonzie]

Umm where did HD-DVD come from? The 360 DOES NOT support HD-DVD as a gaming medium. DVD is the only and i mean only disc that can be used. Plus there are so many references and pieces of technology that are sony based it would be too hard to change them. Trust me MGS4 will never come to the 360. There was a rumour circulating a while back but that was disproved.

Currently the only 360 game i would like to have on PS3 is Left 4 Dead.

DVD9 Capacity= 8.54GB
Blu Ray= 25 GB (single layer)
HD-DVD= 15 GB (single layer)

Haha ok, thank you for clearing that up, kinda proves my point even more.

And agreed, Left 4 Dead would be nice on ps3, and could possibly be ported, because Valve hasn't made an exclusive-to-console game yet.

[aztec_god]

Blue-ray disc right now is the best selling :stunned: And it's probably going to get better because of saw 5 and vegancy 2 they are both really great. Ok well have to go.

[Oyarsa]

MGS4 size wouldn't be a problem at all. Lost Od was on 4 discs, Star Ocean 4 is on 3 discs. I wouldn't mind changing discs for MGS4. I mean, what's the difference? 5 minute install whenever we switch chapters, or a 10 second disc change? Both interrupt game flow.

Not to mention, Kojima spit words out of his ass when he said MGS4 wouldn't fit on a BR-ROM. MGS4 is only 30GB, which leaves PLENTY of room and would only require 4 DVD-9s. Not to mention the BR-ROM does a lot of double-coding to simply access data faster, seeing as BR-ROM drives aren't fast enough yet.

The PS3 can potentially be stronger than the 360, yes, but not the day/night difference people seem to hope for. MGS4 can't be straight ported because of the coding infrastructure, and how it's coded parallel to the PS3's hardware. For instance, you can't run a game that's been coded solely for Windows on OSx, and the other way around. This doesn't mean that the 360 isn't powerful enough, because it is. It just wouldn't be compatible with the current coding. "Porting", in this case, would mean a total re-program.

With today's production costs of videogames skyrocketing due to the gamers' demands for unreal quality, games just about HAVE to become multi-platform, unless heavily sponsored by said exclusive. This is why I personally think the PS4 (or whatever they call it) shouldn't focus on making its infrastructure alien from the rest of the world. The 360 is pretty much a PC, which is what developers have been familiar with for decades. That's why so many games appear on the 360.

[ugabugaz]

The 360's DVD isn't that much faster...
Blu Ray Speed: 9mbps
DVD Speed (Single Layer) (It fluctuates depending on location of the disc):8-16mbps Average:10.25mbps
DVD Dual Layer Speed (Two layers)(Speed fluctuates):4-11mpbs Average:7.93mbps


The constant speed is an advantage.

Also, if you're concerned about lag, a HDD install will completely eliminate it. Now as you see if a game is optimized blu ray is fast enough.
Ex Uncharted , Killzone 2 (No Installs )

[Oyarsa]

Exactly. DVD-9 has the exact same read speed as the BR-ROM drive in the PS3. Sadly, the BR-ROM is a lot larger, so percentage wise the performance is severely lacking. The DVD-9 only has 8.4GB to browse through. The BR-ROM, potentially, 50GB. Takes a lot longer. This is a proven fact, which is why the Blu-Rays often have copied data for faster access.

Much like driving a certain distance to pick up ingredients to bake a pie. Both cars can drive equally fast, but if one car has to drive 100 miles to pick up all the ingredients and the other drives 25 miles to pick them all up, one will be eating sooner than the other.

The installs have been utter bullshit to me, especially with games like GTA4. The 360 STILL loads faster, regardless of the PS3 install. Same with Bioshock. It's merely a counter-measure against the slow BR-ROM read speed.

[tonzie]

Exactly. DVD-9 has the exact same read speed as the BR-ROM drive in the PS3. Sadly, the BR-ROM is a lot larger, so percentage wise the performance is severely lacking. The DVD-9 only has 8.4GB to browse through. The BR-ROM, potentially, 50GB. Takes a lot longer. This is a proven fact, which is why the Blu-Rays often have copied data for faster access.

Much like driving a certain distance to pick up ingredients to bake a pie. Both cars can drive equally fast, but if one car has to drive 100 miles to pick up all the ingredients and the other drives 25 miles to pick them all up, one will be eating sooner than the other.

The installs have been utter bullshit to me, especially with games like GTA4. The 360 STILL loads faster, regardless of the PS3 install. Same with Bioshock. It's merely a counter-measure against the slow BR-ROM read speed.


Your example there makes no sense. I think you mean "If there are a lot more ingredients at one store, it might take a lot longer to search through than the other store which has less, but in the end the person who took longer to search for the best out of the stock will reign happier than the other" ;)

Sorry for not responding in a while, I haven't been too active on this site lately, but I'm back.

And in fact, there is really no MAJOR difference between the read times on these discs, sure Blu-Ray takes a little longer, but it's nothing significant, in fact, it outdoes some HD games (lolo 360) like hmm.. Oblivion? Fallout 3?

Don't go stating your facts without knowing what you're talking about, and learn to use proper analogies. :P

[Oyarsa]

My analogy is perfectly fine - you just miss the point. The read times are just about the exact same. Blu-Ray just has a lot more data to mope through than a DVD-9, causing it to be slower on a larger scale. Both cars need the same ingredients, drive equally fast, but one has to drive a lot further to get to the result than the other. It's about time vs result. The result is the same. The time it takes to get result is not.

When you have a game that takes up a lot more space on a BR-ROM, it takes longer to swim through that to find what you need, but you don't really get any better results. Either that, or you get retarded installs every time you switch/load a chapter, like in MGS4, and that didn't even use a full BR-ROM yet. Like I said, this is why a lot of BR-ROMs have double-data just so it can be accessed faster. The large size of the BR-ROM is, at the current moment, both a blessing and a curse, with future potential for being nothing but a blessing. Today, however, available hardware simply isn't mature enough yet. It's going through the same troubles as DVD did, apart from the fact that DVD was a colossal step forward over VHS, whereas BR-ROM is not a giant step forward over DVD. And what are HD games?

And learn to properly understand analogies.

[tonzie]

By "HD Games" I meant Xbox games, because Xbox 360 games are on HD Discs.
And to be honest, I think my analogy is better than yours, in the fact that they are in the exact same spot, yet one has more things to go through than the other, but I guess yours works well too.

[EstonianBeast]

COD4 is my favorite game on ps3 i think but there gonna be cool good games out soon

[ugabugaz]

COD4 is my favorite game on ps3 i think but there gonna be cool good games out soon
That game WAS my favorite as well. Problem is after like 20+ days I am
1)Bored of it
2)Too good (I always win)