Print

[Reaper527]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Sep 3 2006, 12:57 AM)

No, you're missing the point. Microsoft didn't give us or the developers a choice whether they wanted to develop for HD-DVD or not.  They simply said, we're putting in DVD.  That's not offering much choice between anybody is it?

360 doesn't need HD-DVD or Blueray for its games, and if the ps3 devs would use some compression or do a little bit of in game rendering for cutscenes they wouldn't need it either. the ps3 uses blueray for its games because its there, not because they need it.

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(Reaper527 @ Sep 2 2006, 11:30 PM)

360 doesn't need HD-DVD or Blueray for its games, and if the ps3 devs would use some compression or do a little bit of in game rendering for cutscenes they wouldn't need it either. the ps3 uses blueray for its games because its there, not because they need it.

Exactly, and the main point to all of this BS.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ Sep 3 2006, 07:27 AM)

Exactly, and the main point to all of this BS.

No.  The main point is that it's 600 dollars.  If the PS3 was 399 with Bluray that'd be an entirely different story, and I'd hear all of you change melodies to a happier note.  You people are finding something to blame for the high price and Bluray is an easy target.  You then go into a "we don't need this" mode to find some solace and comfort in that this would probably be the 1 thing that would prevent you from getting a PS3 for years.

This is the same exact argument with the Premium pack and I've heard so many times, I've been done analyzing it, and can spot it from states away.

[Reaper527]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Sep 3 2006, 10:22 AM)

No.  The main point is that it's 600 dollars.  If the PS3 was 399 with Bluray that'd be an entirely different story, and I'd hear all of you change melodies to a happier note.

if the ps3 was 399 with blueray your right and people probably would change their tune because that would be a great deal. most people would be happy if the games where pressed on dvd9 and they offered a blueray player as an optional extra so that we could all save $200 except for the handfull of people who are actually interested in blueray.

[saunders73]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Sep 2 2006, 05:21 PM)

 PC's are always generations behind

LOL, i dont even have to argue that point but i will anyways...the xbox 360 and ps3 are almost equally matched with a top of the line PC and the consoles have to use the same hardware configuration for the whole lifetime of the consoles. While a PC has everchanging parts so in a year or 2 the PC will surpase all 3 of the new consoles (even though it already passed the wii). I dont know Kira Yamoto it seems all you do on this forum is stay in the PS3 section and turn simple pieces of news like "Ps3 not in production yet" which is true into big ass flame wars that go no where and you dig yourself deeper into a hole of people hating you

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(saunders73 @ Sep 3 2006, 05:03 PM)

hile a PC has everchanging parts so in a year or 2 the PC will surpase all 3 of the new consoles (even though it already passed the wii).

PC *technically* will surpass the consoles, but the games won't.  Why? Because PC games are built for lower end configurations for "Minimum System Requirements".  They will always be made like that, I have not seen a change in all my years as a PC gamer, even when my hardware got outdated and stayed on consoles, came back, it was still the same.  Games are made where special effects and stuff can be turned on/off, and made to where the top-end users can see the game at it's highest quality, while other users don't.  Either way, the game is STILL made to play on lower speed/configured machines.  Theres a limit to how good a game will look because of that.

I'm not too worried about the PC scene anyways as the stellar games has always been on consoles.  PC games for me have always revolved around MMORPG's and shooters, other than that its crap.  Until Starcraft II, Diablo III and Warcraft IV come out, I'll still be on WoW and consoles.

Console games on the other hand, don't HAVE a minimum system requirement.  There's a common ground in which all games are made.  There are no installations.  No configuration.  There's a standard controller in which all games use.  All games are built on the same hardware.  In short, everything is standard.  That's why the console market > the pc market.  It's more accessable to people, and there's no hassle.

QUOTE

I dont know Kira Yamoto it seems all you do on this forum is stay in the PS3 section and turn simple pieces of news like "Ps3 not in production yet" which is true into big ass flame wars that go no where

Because people like to focus on the negativity.  I on the other hand, don't.  I do take the news as it comes, but I don't dwell just on the negativity.  I've been posting here since the "wars" started and I'm about the only one that's actually optimistic on the whole thing.  

The reason why flame wars don't go anywhere, is because I send it into a loop, nobody can really argue my point, but I don't bring new points to argue anyways, other than rephrasing what I said, or bringing a different insight on the same topic.

QUOTE

you dig yourself deeper into a hole of people hating you

Does it look like I give a shit? No, I don't.  I could care less if fanboys hate me or not.  I got the worst of it when I was putting down the DS on another board for it's less than average list of titles on launch.  I can take the heat.

The point of my posts, are that I take a non-biased view on the entire spectrum of things, and add some common sense to it. While people try to nitpick every last negative thing about the PS3.  The reason why some people here hate my posts, is because they can't win with me.  They can go on and on about whatever the hell they're talking about, and I'll bring up a common sense point that lands them right back at square one, or have absolutely nothing to say.  It pisses people off, and I know that, but its not my fault that people say stupid shit.  

Say something stupid, I'll poke it full of holes, and while I end up being right or on neutral ground, people will side with the highest concentration of majority opinion just so they can stand with who they think are the winners.  The people who has the most common sense, and act the smartest aren't ever on common ground with these people, and its like that everywhere you go.  Most of these people don't even post because they know about this.  I on the other hand do, because I have a voice, and as long as I'm following forum rules, and mods aren't really bothered, then I'll continue to voice my opinion.

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Sep 3 2006, 08:22 AM)

No.  The main point is that it's 600 dollars.  If the PS3 was 399 with Bluray that'd be an entirely different story, and I'd hear all of you change melodies to a happier note.  You people are finding something to blame for the high price and Bluray is an easy target.  You then go into a "we don't need this" mode to find some solace and comfort in that this would probably be the 1 thing that would prevent you from getting a PS3 for years.

This is the same exact argument with the Premium pack and I've heard so many times, I've been done analyzing it, and can spot it from states away.

Yes.  The main point is blu-ray is not NEEDED (repeat with with me, NEEDED) for next gen games.  It is for HD movies, but not games.  There is no question that for $600 the ps3 is one hell of a deal for what it has to offer.  Bu you need to ask yourself this: do i buy a ps3 for games or movies?  If it is for games, then blu-ray is an added expensive that was not needed.  The trade off of extra space that blu-ray provides does not merit the benfits it will give for gaming vs. the extra cost that could have been avoided if they went with dvd-9.  Plain and simple.

Being optimistic is great, but being an unrealistic fanboy is not.  I'm not saying you are, but you are borderline.

[Kira Yamoto]

The reason why I'm reluctant about dismissing Bluray as an added expense, is because there's infinite realms of possibilities that developers can do with space, not just cinematics.  If we don't give those developers the chance, then how will we know what they could have done, or what grand plans they had in mind?  Right now, the extra space, widely assumed, is used for cinematics and extra features for the games.  I'm taking the wait and see approach as to what developers will use the space for.  What if, in the future, the space really did make a difference.  Are you worried about eating your own words? Because I am, and I don't like the feeling when somebody shoves their victory down my throat.  

I'm not disputing DVD9 and its usefulness for next-gen games.   Knowing that dvd9 is "enough" doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss Bluray of it's possible applications it could bring for the PS3.  What if they made a "Bluray Loader" for the PS2 emulator within PS3 and you're able to compile all your old games into one disk, and launch them from that program?  That kind of program was developed for Xbox AND PS2 and just the idea of using it sounds fantastic.  I have about 70 plus games, and those take up a lot of space.  What if I could roll all of that into one disk and fit them in no less than half a spindle, or a few cases?

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE

Yet the source you provided to show that the Ps3 was not difficult to develop for was from the Guardian, and quoted a company making a PS3 game (therefore containing a biased opinion) - 'its not as difficult as people make out' is what they stated: which in no way discredits our contention that it is relatively more difficult. Yet you still acted like it was an unreasonable opinion to hold. We tried to convince you using sources and evidence, you used "common sense" and an old and tainted article.

I also quoted an article from IGN, the interview with the developer of Resistance Fall of Man.  You guys responded with, well they're biased and of course they're going to promote their game, so who gives a doodle?  Yet all of you missed the fact that the same game is also coming out on the 360.  Which contradicts the point that they're only promoting their game, because if that's so, then they're dissing their own 360 version, which I'm sure they wouldn't want the bad publicity.  

The quote I provided also proved an earlier point I made.  You only want to focus on the negativity.  Look at what you said.  You said the single site I cited as a source, was the Guardian, but I also had provided an interview that IGN did, knowing that, that interview had more creds than Guardian yet you conveniently kept it out b/c then, you wouldn't have such a strong case to argue with.

It is an unreasonable opinion to hold, because you aren't a Cell developer or programmer and nor is Kage.  Thus the sources we cite are all we have.  You already dismissed mine, and I dismissed yours because they came from a blog, a Wii FORUM, and an opinion from a MS employee/dev.  I never said any of those guys were right or wrong, I just dismissed it because of the uncertainty from which the sources originated due to possible biased and self-promotion just like you used on me.  If I posted Hideo Kojima's thoughts on dev'ing for PS3, in which he stated that the PS3 was actually a lot more easier to develop for than previously on PS2, then you'll dismiss it b/c he's promoting his game, don't you see? No matter what you won't accept it for one reason or another.  I can do the same, for any of your points.

QUOTE

I also provided links to Carmack stating that it was a 'pain in the arse'. YOU IGNORED THESE. - DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOUR MAIN ARGUEMENT WAS THAT YOU WANTED TO HEAR IT FROM DEVELOPERS, NOT 'FANBOYS'

I didn't get to read that because my internet was disc/, therefore I didn't ignore it.  There's also an issue with a statement from Carmack.  When revealed that he was dev'ing UT for the PS3, he actually praised it a lot, and these statements contradict what he said in the past.  Therefore his statements and opinions aren't worth a lot to me, as I believe they're affected by gaming politics.  How am I to know that these statements are any different?

QUOTE

you start talking of "common sense" - as if your version of it is some overriding and universal force.

Yeah because common sense beats the hell out of theorizing all day with zero certainty on any of the subject matter.  Yes there is that overriding and universal force.  If you sat all day, and theorized if its possible to jump a ramp with this car, and came to the conclusion that it isnt possible based on theory, yet someone comes by and actually jumps the ramp with the car, which beat your theory.  In the fighting game scene, we call this Theory Fighter, and most expert players only use it, but always end up testing it and proving it instead of just talking about it.  Which is what all of this is, just talk, and second-hand opinions from a few dev's and publishers that we can't really say for sure what their intentions were, when they said it.  While you guys take their word for it (because it suits what you want to hear) I'd rather take a more realistic approach to it, and see the results for myself.

QUOTE

You come across as very unreasonable and frankly quite arrogant

So are the majority of you that posts against me.  &?

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Sep 3 2006, 02:07 PM)

I didn't get to read that because my internet was disc/, therefore I didn't ignore it.  There's also an issue with a statement from Carmack.  When revealed that he was dev'ing UT for the PS3, he actually praised it a lot, and these statements contradict what he said in the past.  Therefore his statements and opinions aren't worth a lot to me, as I believe they're affected by gaming politics.  How am I to know that these statements are any different?

John Carmack developing Unreal Tournament?  Who would have thought?

I would love to see that link Mr. i need references.

QUOTE

I also quoted an article from IGN, the interview with the developer of Resistance Fall of Man. You guys responded with, well they're biased and of course they're going to promote their game, so who gives a doodle? Yet all of you missed the fact that the same game is also coming out on the 360. Which contradicts the point that they're only promoting their game, because if that's so, then they're dissing their own 360 version, which I'm sure they wouldn't want the bad publicity.

So now resistance:FoM is coming to the 360.  That's like saying halo3 is coming to the ps3.

[Kira Yamoto]

1. No you didn't. You quoted Blazing Angels. Resistance is not coming out on the 360 as far as Im aware: just like every other Insomniac game Im aware of.

[incognegro]

QUOTE

Um, the 360 forced that hardware config for us. The console had what you want. Microsoft made all the decisions for what goes into the system FOR you. MS then gave you extra options as addons. The only choice you made is buying the console. What if I wanted to put a bluray or hddvd drive in my 360? I can't do that, nor will the games support it. I could on my PC, but PC's are always generations behind b/c they have to cater to the lower pc user and build from there. You see, there is no choice in the config for my console, only that I chose to buy it.

Sorry I didnt respond earlier but im still at awe at how little sense that made!

This just proves to me that ur logic makes no sense. So ur saying that the "extra add-ons" dont qualify as "choices"?

Your saying that because the HD DVD drive isn't "in" my 360, it doesnt qualify as a choice?

And if the HD DVD drive was used for games then it wouldnt be much of a choice anymore, now would it? Because everyone would need to play certain games.