Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Deepblue on October 19, 2006, 10:53:59 pm
-
Worth a laugh.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/19/sony-claims-xbox-360-requires-hd-dvd-etc-thus-costs-700
Ok, here's a new one: with Sony's announcements today they've issued a titled "Next-generation Console Comparison Fact Sheet," (downloadable here [DOC]) so let's see some facts. First up, were you aware that to use your Xbox 360 Core system you're required to buy the 20GB drive add-on, an HD DVD drive, a wireless controller, and an Xbox Live sub? We weren't either. But hey, it says right there, "requires users to buy" and this is, in fact, a "fact sheet." Of course, none of that's actually true, and what's more, were one to use the Xbox 360 Premium console pack in that chart instead of the Core pack, the total would be $399 for a console with that very same hard drive, wireless controller, and Xbox Live Silver subscription (which provides access to everything but multiplayer) -- remember, kids, an HD DVD drive is not required to do anything but watch high def movies -- it has nothing to do with high def gaming. We hear Microsoft ain't too happy about this chart either and is preparing certain legal action, namely because it could be misleading to otherwise unwitting retail employees selling customers game consoles this holiday season. Go figure.
P.S. -In the interest of fairness, it's also worth pointing out the Wii browser is what will cost you after the first 6 months -- not their online service. What's more, if you download the browser before June of 2007, it's straight up free. Otherwise, Nintendo hasn't yet announced details of the cost of their online service so far as we know. Another nice one, Sony.
P.P.S. -We just confirmed with Microsoft that another Sony claim -- that you need a memory unit or a hard drive to use the WiFi adapter -- is also false. You can grab a Core pack with no memory card and plug in a WiFi adapter and get on your home network. Sheez Sony, did we mention we moonlight as fact checkers?
-
It's almost as if Sony is trying to make this console generation harder for themselves.
-
Oh yeah, the first 500,000 PS3s will come with Talladega Nights on Blu-Ray. Too bad that both SKUs only include COMPOSITE. No component. Seriously, wth Sony? You try to promote Blu-Ray to the masses with THIS crap?
-
'sorry, but find a pc that can play a whole library of new games for years to come for only $500 or $600...now just go on, yeah...didn't think it was so easy, it's actually impossible without upgrading the graphics card about every year and a half'
I felt so moved by that quote I had to respond.
-
That stevo bloke is hilarious. His response to everything is "Ha ha Fanboy" and then he goes and sucks some more MS cock. I mean, I thought you were pretty bad deepblue but...wow.
Honestly, you people.
-
Welcome to the internet.
-
That stevo bloke is hilarious. His response to everything is "Ha ha Fanboy" and then he goes and sucks some more MS cock. I mean, I thought you were pretty bad deepblue but...wow.
Honestly, you people.
Yin and Yang; ridiculous Sony Pr bull**** presented with a sheen of MS PR bull****. This is quite a big reason why I don't intend to buy stuff from either company. That, and the lack of any sort of interesting games.
-
Now, now, i'm going to have to disagree with you there. Granted, Halo 3 and MGS3 aren't exactly Zelda titles, but they're still pretty damn interesting. Hell, the former was the entire reason for my purchasing a 360.
-
Now, now, i'm going to have to disagree with you there. Granted, Halo 3 and MGS3 aren't exactly Zelda titles, but they're still pretty damn interesting. Hell, the former was the entire reason for my purchasing a 360.
Umm.... a) Neither are out and b) come on, they've not exactly shown anything new and exciting, have they? Halo 3 is a straight up shooter, and MGS3...well, I don't give a monkeys about whatsoever.
Fair enough if you like them. I'm just saying, nothing on the 360 or (especially, as it's not even out...) PS3 interests me, personally, enough to buy it at the moment. About the closest thing was Dead Rising, but even then it's not really enough to wet my tongue. Whereas the Wii, which I'll admit to being rather the embarassing fanboy about justnow, does look very interesting to me because it's new.
It's like, um, playing Mario Hoops on the DS (FYI; a basketball game using stylus to control shots - like you tap down to bounce the ball when dribbling, stroke up to shoot, down to steal, etc) - far more interesting than regular basketball, which is a sport I normally couldn't give a damn about. Unfortunately, Mario Hoops is also infuriatingly aggravating as you're playing against ninja athletes, the camera angles are pretty dodgy, there are some stupid design decisions (like no auto-switching to the player closest to the ball) and it's incredibly finicky to play for a left hander, but the principle is sound :)
Er...where was I? Oh, yeah. Anyways, I'd play the likes of Pro Evo with a normal controller. And probably racing games or maybe GTA. But FPS, other types of sports games like baseball, bore the hell out of me with a normal joypad (and I seem to be the only person in the world who finds both the PS2-soon-to-be-rumble-free-on-PS3 and 360 joypads utterly ****, and moreso the latter), so I'm not interested in these 'flagship titles' like Halo 3, etc, whereas something like Red Steel does interest me :)
Which is probably going wholly off-topic when really all I wanted to do is slag off Sony PR pish and Deepblues' amusingly rabid fanboyism (being ramped up in advance for a heavy christmas campaign?) in response to something we'd all probably have never seen and certainly never took seriously. I digress :D
-
Oh yeah, the first 500,000 PS3s will come with Talladega Nights on Blu-Ray. Too bad that both SKUs only include COMPOSITE. No component. Seriously, wth Sony? You try to promote Blu-Ray to the masses with THIS crap?
maybe sony's colorblind?
i mean, Composite = Yellow, Red, White
Component, Green, Blue, red
-
Umm.... a) Neither are out
You made a decidedly obvious blanket statement in your previous post, so I would ill-advise tacking on conditions to your generalisations after the fact.
and b) come on, they've not exactly shown anything new and exciting, have they? Halo 3 is a straight up shooter, and MGS3...well, I don't give a monkeys about whatsoever.
The term 'interesting' is slightly ambiguous and subjective to begin with, but I would still conclude that the flagship games of both consoles should at least earn that humble title.
Fair enough if you like them. I'm just saying, nothing on the 360 or (especially, as it's not even out...) PS3 interests me, personally, enough to buy it at the moment.
I'm not really fond of them either. Never played an MGS title, and the only reason i'm as interested as I am in Halo 3 is the both the good sci-fi story [a rarity these days], and the orgasmically excellent music that will surely accompany it if the E3 trailer is any indication.
Whereas the Wii, which I'll admit to being rather the embarassing fanboy about justnow, does look very interesting to me because it's new.
Believe me when I say we all know about your fanboi-ism. Granted, you don't make threads every other week about the Wii, but you do make sure to mention your feelings every time the subject of console gaming comes up. :rolleyes:
I like to think of you as 'bizzaro DeepBlue'.
Which is probably going wholly off-topic when really all I wanted to do is slag off Sony PR pish and Deepblues' amusingly rabid fanboyism (being ramped up in advance for a heavy christmas campaign?).
Now that's just not fair. Three posts providing information and a joke hardly constitutes 'rabid fanboyism', moreso the fact that he's no longer making spamalicious threads pimping a single 360 screenshot every week as he once did. I dare say that calling the 'fanboi' card on DB has become somewhat obnoxious, and I would expect better from the likes of you.
-
I'm not really fond of them either. Never played an MGS title, and the only reason i'm as interested as I am in Halo 3 is the both the good sci-fi story [a rarity these days], and the orgasmically excellent music that will surely accompany it if the E3 trailer is any indication.
Well, I simply don't agree (the Halo theme tune is quite good, though, but I'm not that much a fan of the rest of the music from the 1st). Like I said, personal opinion; I'm not excited by either in the slightest.
Believe me when I say we all know about your fanboi-ism. Granted, you don't make threads every other week about the Wii, but you do make sure to mention your feelings every time the subject of console gaming comes up. :rolleyes:
I like to think of you as 'bizzaro DeepBlue'.
Hey, I'm honest about my enthusiasm. Ask me about Rangers vs Livorno last night and you'd get the same type of responses.
Now that's just not fair. Three posts providing information and a joke hardly constitutes 'rabid fanboyism', moreso the fact that he's no longer making spamalicious threads pimping a single 360 screenshot every week as he once did. I dare say that calling the 'fanboi' card on DB has become somewhat obnoxious, and I would expect better from the likes of you.
Oh yeah, the first 500,000 PS3s will come with Talladega Nights on Blu-Ray. Too bad that both SKUs only include COMPOSITE. No component. Seriously, wth Sony? You try to promote Blu-Ray to the masses with THIS crap?
-
I don't even understand that, let alone think it's blatant fanboi-ism.
-
I always find threads about fanboism amazing on a Board almost totally dedicated to a 5-year old game that stopped being mass produced years ago...... ;)
-
Composite = SD.
Component = HD.
Alot of Joe Smoes are not going to be happy when their new PS3 doesn't play in HD out of the box.
-
People need to leaarn, Ignorance is no excuse :)
I worked for DSG and people asked the most stupid questions,
*true story*
Over peak season, a young enough couple (early 20's -council estate like my good self,) with a sprog in tow, approached me carrying an HP inkjet printer.
HIM
"scuse' me moosh, will' dis ere get me on that intah-nett (phonetic)"
HER
"its got buttons on front of it mark"
HIM
"So squire, 30 nicker, is this the business, will i get free movies of the intah-net?"
ME-
What are you on about, ? Its a printer mate,. . . . . . . . It prints.
HIM,
"you avin a laugh?
ME-
Seriously, do you see a screen or a keyboard on the fron of that box?
HER
"Thats a good point, we dont see no buttons....Oh"
HIM,
Nah,....but i thought,-
ME-
How about we put that back on the shelf, and you come with me........
HIM,
"thats alright mate, we dont wanna spend more than £50 quid to get hooked up on this net thing."
ME-
£50? mate you need to come back in 10 years..............
-
I don't even understand that, let alone think it's blatant fanboi-ism.
Fair point. Rather than the de-riguer tactic of just ducking out the thread, I'd like to apologise to Deepblue and offer the excuse that I a) went to be late last night and b) have only just had coffee.
I'm still not interested in MGS or Halo 3, though.
Composite = SD.
Component = HD.
Alot of Joe Smoes are not going to be happy when their new PS3 doesn't play in HD out of the box.
A lot of people don't realise you need an HD TV for HD anyways, so it probably won't lead to that much of a furore (just mild whimpering). Albeit HD penetration is only, what, 20% in the US and lower in europe, so I'm not sure how many people know the difference.
-
I don't even understand that, let alone think it's blatant fanboi-ism.
Fair point. Rather than the de-riguer tactic of just ducking out the thread, I'd like to apologise to Deepblue and offer the excuse that I a) went to be late last night and b) have only just had coffee.
I'm still not interested in MGS or Halo 3, though.
Composite = SD.
Component = HD.
Alot of Joe Smoes are not going to be happy when their new PS3 doesn't play in HD out of the box.
A lot of people don't realise you need an HD TV for HD anyways, so it probably won't lead to that much of a furore (just mild whimpering). Albeit HD penetration is only, what, 20% in the US and lower in europe, so I'm not sure how many people know the difference.
there's a lot of people out there with cheapass SD TV's out there... at least microsoft played it smart and used a cable that does both HD and SD..
as for the latest installments in the MGS and Halo series, they're not even out yet, and aside from trailers and a bit of eyecandy, failed to impress me. i'll still get halo 3, mind you, but there's other perfectly legit games out there that seek to grab people's attention Gears of War, Bioshock, Mass effect, just to name a few coming to the 360..
The nintendo wii has sold itself, mind you,
the PS3's array of launch titles have failed to impress me, really, the really impressive ones won't be released soon enough for anybody to warrent forking over such an amount of cash..
folks, Console Fanboi-ism is rather stupid(not directing at anybody in particular) , to be honest, it's quite counter-productive, without the games, a console is just an expensive waste of space.
Oh!, and before i forget, a $600 USD PC's backwards compatability?... with the right software... well it, let's just say.. "nibbles", anyone? :p
-
The fact here wasn't that you need those things to run the consoles, it's that the 360 is a piece of **** if it doesn't have all the additional crap to make it rival the PS3.
Sure, you don't NEED the 20gig hard drive, and you don't NEED the HD-DVD drive, but the fact doesn't change that, movie quality aside, using the new formats for storage capacity (just as Microsoft's own Flight Simulator X comes on TWO DVD drives - the format storage discussion ending right then and there) loosens the boundaries games are constrained by.
The Xbox360's core system is a joke that everyone got a laugh on in (really, who the **** owns that one?), and the Premium is so hot they're already scrambling to create a 100gb hard drive, because the current one can't compete with Sony's 60gb one.
There's a reason why Microsoft is already doing R&D for the next Xbox console. This one, now with the advent of Wii and PS3 on the horizon, looks like ugly trash. And it's not like they're not smart to do it really, somehow they managed to **** themselves in the ass and go against their prime directive. We all know the Xbox as a platform, is only meant to take consumers' money away from Sony and Nintendo so that they wouldn't have a monopoly on console, or should we call it "non-PC" gaming, so it really doesn't matter if the company takes a dive on the platform profits, as long as that money doesn't go into Sony's and Nintendo's profit margin.
Bottom line - if you don't spend more than $600 on your Xbox, you do not compete in the "next-gen" category. You're left with a white piece of **** that's just simply likely to overheat. PS3 may have its fair share of problems, but no matter how much the paid off news sites are trying to suck MS' cock, facts are facts. Xbox isn't worth any money whatsoever, unless you're a Halo fan. The end. Every other game will be available to be played on the PC anyway. Actually, Halo included probably.
-
The fact here wasn't that you need those things to run the consoles, it's that the 360 is a piece of **** if it doesn't have all the additional crap to make it rival the PS3.
Sure, you don't NEED the 20gig hard drive, and you don't NEED the HD-DVD drive, but the fact doesn't change that, movie quality aside, using the new formats for storage capacity (just as Microsoft's own Flight Simulator X comes on TWO DVD drives - the format storage discussion ending right then and there) loosens the boundaries games are constrained by.
The Xbox360's core system is a joke that everyone got a laugh on in (really, who the **** owns that one?), and the Premium is so hot they're already scrambling to create a 100gb hard drive, because the current one can't compete with Sony's 60gb one.
There's a reason why Microsoft is already doing R&D for the next Xbox console. This one, now with the advent of Wii and PS3 on the horizon, looks like ugly trash. And it's not like they're not smart to do it really, somehow they managed to **** themselves in the ass and go against their prime directive. We all know the Xbox as a platform, is only meant to take consumers' money away from Sony and Nintendo so that they wouldn't have a monopoly on console, or should we call it "non-PC" gaming, so it really doesn't matter if the company takes a dive on the platform profits, as long as that money doesn't go into Sony's and Nintendo's profit margin.
Bottom line - if you don't spend more than $600 on your Xbox, you do not compete in the "next-gen" category. You're left with a white piece of **** that's just simply likely to overheat. PS3 may have its fair share of problems, but no matter how much the paid off news sites are trying to suck MS' cock, facts are facts. Xbox isn't worth any money whatsoever, unless you're a Halo fan. The end. Every other game will be available to be played on the PC anyway. Actually, Halo included probably.
i can feel the love from here! :p ;)
-
Can't feel it truly until you turn that stupid censor off.
Oh oops, my bad on the 100gig drive Microsoft was supposedly planning. I guess that piece of news was fake. Seems like inferior storage capacity is the ultimate answer then.
-
Daaaaammnnnnnn.
(will not comment further)
-
No need for you to comment. This isn't a discussion or a debate.
-
other than savegames, what do you ultimately need the Hard Drive for?, i mean sure you can store demos and stuff on the damn thing, but also get rid of them when they outlive their usefulness.
-
Furthermore, why is HD media necessary for next-gen gaming? The truth is it isn't. You can get everything you need for next gen gaming with $299, and you can step it up with perks (which, I might add, were available last-gen as well) for $399.
Or you can try new-gen gaming for $249.
If you want an HD movie player though, yes the 360 will cost just as much as the PS3. But you HAVE THE OPTION. Remember, this is a GAME console.
-
*read*
Oh, BS from Sony? That's all. Big whoop. They specialize in that.
If they manage to get their PS3 to give killer BJ's, call me. Until then, you can find me in the nintendo camp.
-
really, all i can see "Blue-Ray" being used for so far is more voiceacting in Square-enix games. :p
-
It wasn't that long ago that people were wondering what on earth games would need all the storage capacity on a CD for you know...
-
nintendo wins this round of the console war
-
nintendo wins this round of the console war
Now, now, the dice are still in the air. Come November we'll see whether or not Big N craps out.
-
It wasn't that long ago that people were wondering what on earth games would need all the storage capacity on a CD for you know...
Probabily not soon, but if the UHDV is implemented in the future, then even Blu-rays with 6 layers won't have enough space to store enough video for a movie, unless someone makes an encoding format with incredible high compression ratios that mantains quality overall.
-
Furthermore, why is HD media necessary for next-gen gaming?
Personally, I don't think it's necessary at all. Well into the future, sure, but certainly not the current ("next") generation.
-
really all disc space would be used for is more voiceacting, larger, bloated designs, higher texture resolutions..
all of which would be limited by whatever bottlenecks the system has.
i think sony's gone and shot themselves in the foot, a console is not the way to test thoroughly unproven, and pretty much still in flux, drive formats.
they didn't learn from their betamax experience, that's for sure.
the success of blue-ray hinges on the success of the PS3, which hinges on the success of its games, which are on blue-ray... a vicious cycle, perhaps?
-
they didn't learn from their betamax experience, that's for sure.
That was Sony?
-
Furthermore, why is HD media necessary for next-gen gaming? The truth is it isn't. You can get everything you need for next gen gaming with $299, and you can step it up with perks (which, I might add, were available last-gen as well) for $399.
Or you can try new-gen gaming for $249.
If you want an HD movie player though, yes the 360 will cost just as much as the PS3. But you HAVE THE OPTION. Remember, this is a GAME console.
Wasn't MS doing the big 'only HD' type advertising thing when the 360 was released? Only logical that sony hook onto that, especially given their TVs et al (and the Bravia is a gorgeous piece of kit, just overpriced).
HD media is an interesting one.... on the one hand, the PS3 is most definately a Trojan Horse for Blu-ray and there's no immediate need for it. However, it's also worth noting that modern games tend to be rather huge once installed - Flight Simulator X is apparently 15GB - and that size is simply going to increase overtime (in much the same way as early PS2 games used CDs and now we see DVDs completely filled). But then you have another layer of interesting complexity on top of that in the form of compression and procedurally generated content.
Truth is, of course, you can get everything you need for 'next gen' gaming for less than $299 depending on what you define next gen as. If it's the Wiis' control method; $249 (I think?). If it's the 360s horsepower and (established) internet connectivity, it's $299 (plus perhaps some optional bodgins). And if it's the PS3s arguably greater longevity, HD movie playback (which some people do care about, certainly the lack of it was attributed as a failing of the Gamecube) and, um, ability to function as a fallout shelter once hollowed out, it's something ludicrous.
(to be fair, I've heard a fair number of positive reports about the PS3 as a console; the impression I've been getting is if it was $100US cheaper, it'd be a front-runner ahead of the 360 simply down to brand power and the 360s continuing and surprisingly poor* sales)
*less sales than the original Xbox in the same time period and still being outsold by the - obviously differently priced - PS2 in the US, I believe.
-
they didn't learn from their betamax experience, that's for sure.
That was Sony?
yep
http://www.mediacollege.com/video/format/beta/betamax.html
-
Ugh, I had to convert like 200 betamax tapes to DVD for work, and because we didn't have the right equipment, I had to go through VHS in the process. Took weeks.
-
My local Co-Op had 360 Premium Packs for £300 last week.
Even so, I couldn't justify that kinda cash on a console.
-
The reason they all want movie playing is because of the success of the original Playstation 2 in Japan, back when a standalone DVD player was still an expensive item.
To get a game console AND a DVD player (which also played all the Playstation one games) for not much more than a DVD player was a big deal.
Meanwhile, SEGA didn't have the money up front to buy DVD reader mechanisims for the Dreamcast. (Though I wonder how much they spent in R&D on the GigabyteDisc-ROM, or did that come from another company?) Ohyeah, and their stupid gaffe of telling the world they weren't making any more consoles after the DC. Yeah, that helped sales...
SEGA had one bright spot in their home videogame history, when their 16bit console blasted Nintendo off the top of the heap. From there it was one stupid desicion after another, and the bad luck to be the first presenter at the first E3, with the Saturn*, only to be blasted by Sony's simple announcement of a price $100 less for the Playstation.
Hmmm, this is interesting, a list of 792 Dreamcast games. *woot* Any other consoles meet or beat that? And ISRT that a couple new DC games were released last year. SEGA is also selling refurbished Dreamcasts on their website somewhere. :)
*And not demanding that the majority of Saturn games use both CPUs and video processors. Too many games only used HALF the Saturn's capability.
-
The reason they all want movie playing is because of the success of the original Playstation 2 in Japan, back when a standalone DVD player was still an expensive item.
To get a game console AND a DVD player (which also played all the Playstation one games) for not much more than a DVD player was a big deal.
Meanwhile, SEGA didn't have the money up front to buy DVD reader mechanisims for the Dreamcast. (Though I wonder how much they spent in R&D on the GigabyteDisc-ROM, or did that come from another company?) Ohyeah, and their stupid gaffe of telling the world they weren't making any more consoles after the DC. Yeah, that helped sales...
SEGA had one bright spot in their home videogame history, when their 16bit console blasted Nintendo off the top of the heap. From there it was one stupid desicion after another, and the bad luck to be the first presenter at the first E3, with the Saturn*, only to be blasted by Sony's simple announcement of a price $100 less for the Playstation.
Hmmm, this is interesting, a list of 792 Dreamcast games. *woot* Any other consoles meet or beat that? And ISRT that a couple new DC games were released last year. SEGA is also selling refurbished Dreamcasts on their website somewhere. :)
*And not demanding that the majority of Saturn games use both CPUs and video processors. Too many games only used HALF the Saturn's capability.
do note that the dreamcast has a huge indy following, and third party games for the DC are abundant in japan. from a western market perspective, the Dreamcast is all but dead, in japan, it's reasonably alive and well.
-
http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20061011
and just coause it's fun:
http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20061025
-
The reason they all want movie playing is because of the success of the original Playstation 2 in Japan, back when a standalone DVD player was still an expensive item.
To get a game console AND a DVD player (which also played all the Playstation one games) for not much more than a DVD player was a big deal.
Meanwhile, SEGA didn't have the money up front to buy DVD reader mechanisims for the Dreamcast. (Though I wonder how much they spent in R&D on the GigabyteDisc-ROM, or did that come from another company?) Ohyeah, and their stupid gaffe of telling the world they weren't making any more consoles after the DC. Yeah, that helped sales...
SEGA had one bright spot in their home videogame history, when their 16bit console blasted Nintendo off the top of the heap. From there it was one stupid desicion after another, and the bad luck to be the first presenter at the first E3, with the Saturn*, only to be blasted by Sony's simple announcement of a price $100 less for the Playstation.
Hmmm, this is interesting, a list of 792 Dreamcast games. *woot* Any other consoles meet or beat that? And ISRT that a couple new DC games were released last year. SEGA is also selling refurbished Dreamcasts on their website somewhere. :)
*And not demanding that the majority of Saturn games use both CPUs and video processors. Too many games only used HALF the Saturn's capability.
do note that the dreamcast has a huge indy following, and third party games for the DC are abundant in japan. from a western market perspective, the Dreamcast is all but dead, in japan, it's reasonably alive and well.
plus the American market was by far the best for the MegaDrive
-
i did a little reading.
from what i can tell, from a hardware and performance perspective, neither console is /really/ better than the other.
oh, and the PS3's backwards compatability is emulator-based, and aparrently not gonna be that much better than the 360's :p
and i have drive specs.
Sony PS3 Blue-Ray:
1.5x speed, 9mb per sec read.
Microsoft Xbox 360 DVD
12x speed, 16mb per sec.
oh, and the ps3's controller won't have rumble capability.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/03/27/sony-forced-to-stop-selling-dual-shock-controllers/
also, with this whole 1080p business, nobody's making games that go that high yet, even though that now, both consoles can support it.
not to mention that a lot of developers are utilising the same amount of graphical resources to bring a game to both the 360 AND PS3..
in reality, which is better than the other, is moot.
-
i did a little reading.
from what i can tell, from a hardware and performance perspective, neither console is /really/ better than the other.
oh, and the PS3's backwards compatability is emulator-based, and aparrently not gonna be that much better than the 360's :p
and i have drive specs.
Sony PS3 Blue-Ray:
1.5x speed, 9mb per sec read.
Microsoft Xbox 360 DVD
12x speed, 16mb per sec.
oh, and the ps3's controller won't have rumble capability.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/03/27/sony-forced-to-stop-selling-dual-shock-controllers/
also, with this whole 1080p business, nobody's making games that go that high yet, even though that now, both consoles can support it.
not to mention that a lot of developers are utilising the same amount of graphical resources to bring a game to both the 360 AND PS3..
in reality, which is better than the other, is moot.
It's all down to games. Although - IMO - the 360 is lacking a true killer app at the moment (and suffering from some really shoddy port-cum-multi-format games), so is - moreso - the PS3.
-
Gears of War + Lost Planet.
2 Killer Apps right there.
-
Funny, you're the only person Ive ever heard go on about gears of war. And Ive heard nothing of Lost Planet. Must be real killer.
-
Gears of War + Lost Planet.
2 Killer Apps right there.
Surely any argument about either needs to wait until either is released.
-
i did a little reading.
from what i can tell, from a hardware and performance perspective, neither console is /really/ better than the other.
oh, and the PS3's backwards compatability is emulator-based, and aparrently not gonna be that much better than the 360's :p
and i have drive specs.
Sony PS3 Blue-Ray:
1.5x speed, 9mb per sec read.
Microsoft Xbox 360 DVD
12x speed, 16mb per sec.
oh, and the ps3's controller won't have rumble capability.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/03/27/sony-forced-to-stop-selling-dual-shock-controllers/
also, with this whole 1080p business, nobody's making games that go that high yet, even though that now, both consoles can support it.
not to mention that a lot of developers are utilising the same amount of graphical resources to bring a game to both the 360 AND PS3..
in reality, which is better than the other, is moot.
It's all down to games. Although - IMO - the 360 is lacking a true killer app at the moment (and suffering from some really shoddy port-cum-multi-format games), so is - moreso - the PS3.
and therin lies my point..
as for deepblue's "killer app" thing, i remember a lot of things being touted as killer apps, they failed to live up to expectations, let's hold off the jubiliation over their existance until they're actually -released-, k?
-
Gears of War + Lost Planet.
2 Killer Apps right there.
Surely any argument about either needs to wait until either is released.
For GoW, all will be clear this tuesday.
As for Lost Planet, the demo + the vids in the following link completely convinced me.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/743/743340p1.html
EDIT: Removed gifs.
-
Myself, I found this (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154665) little GoW trailer quite entertaining.
-
Myself, I found this (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154665) little GoW trailer quite entertaining.
the mad world trailer is awesome, just from a presentation perspective.
and deepblue, i have a 512K adsl connection, and those bloody animated GIF's kill my bandwidth..
think of those poor schlubs still on 56k.
-
the mad world trailer is awesome, just from a presentation perspective.
Yep. The look on the bloke's face when he starts firing at that gigantic spider thing syncs up with the song so damn well. :yes:
-
It's good presentation but I'm honestly not all that impressed with what it shows in terms of content and graphics. We're about two generations beyond where graphics could differentiate one game from another anyway and showing a pre-rendered special effects shot, that says nothing about gameplay, doesn't really make me jump. And the whole not yet released thing still comes to mind.
-
It's good presentation but I'm honestly not all that impressed with what it shows in terms of content and graphics. We're about two generations beyond where graphics could differentiate one game from another anyway and showing a pre-rendered special effects shot, that says nothing about gameplay, doesn't really make me jump. And the whole not yet released thing still comes to mind.
*hint* That's not prerendered.
Watch the latest 1up show. They say the trailer = game graphics. Furthermore, from the "behind the scenes" of the trailer at Gamespot, according to Epic, everything you see in the trailer can be executed in game, except for when Marcus is lying on his face.
-
It's good presentation but I'm honestly not all that impressed with what it shows in terms of content and graphics. We're about two generations beyond where graphics could differentiate one game from another anyway and showing a pre-rendered special effects shot, that says nothing about gameplay, doesn't really make me jump. And the whole not yet released thing still comes to mind.
*hint* That's not prerendered.
Watch the latest 1up show. They say the trailer = game graphics. Furthermore, from the "behind the scenes" of the trailer at Gamespot, according to Epic, everything you see in the trailer can be executed in game, except for when Marcus is lying on his face.
Well, I try not to waste my time watching the commercial-cum-TV shows that cover this sort of thing, so I don't have that level of expertise. My comment still stands in full. Game graphics can, and often are, prerendered, and that commercial does not show one moment of actual gameplay. Even if you can pull off the same style moves, you can't do it from that perspective and there's nothing saying the graphics will even look the same. And I'm not saying anything one way or another about the graphics; they're expected to be good these days and I'm not saying that Gears of War will necessarily dissapoint. I'm saying that the commercial itself doesn't really give me anything to go on. And remember, killer graphics != killer app, and killer app is what you said it would be.
-
No, I'm saying the graphics are the same. All according to reporters who have had hands-on time in order to review the game.
And yes, they say it's really fun too. Nifty even.
-
I know nothing at all about this game or how good it's going to be, but that trailer really was amazing.
-
It's good presentation but I'm honestly not all that impressed with what it shows in terms of content and graphics. We're about two generations beyond where graphics could differentiate one game from another anyway and showing a pre-rendered special effects shot, that says nothing about gameplay, doesn't really make me jump. And the whole not yet released thing still comes to mind.
*hint* That's not prerendered.
Watch the latest 1up show. They say the trailer = game graphics. Furthermore, from the "behind the scenes" of the trailer at Gamespot, according to Epic, everything you see in the trailer can be executed in game, except for when Marcus is lying on his face.
Well, I try not to waste my time watching the commercial-cum-TV shows that cover this sort of thing, so I don't have that level of expertise. My comment still stands in full. Game graphics can, and often are, prerendered, and that commercial does not show one moment of actual gameplay. Even if you can pull off the same style moves, you can't do it from that perspective and there's nothing saying the graphics will even look the same. And I'm not saying anything one way or another about the graphics; they're expected to be good these days and I'm not saying that Gears of War will necessarily dissapoint. I'm saying that the commercial itself doesn't really give me anything to go on. And remember, killer graphics != killer app, and killer app is what you said it would be.
note: i said it looked good from a presentation perspective, nicely composed, everything.
we'll see if it's ingame or not when it comes to release time, and actual gameplay ensues. :nod:
http://au.xbox360.ign.com/articles/744/744008p1.html console fanboys should read this.
-
http://au.xbox360.ign.com/articles/744/744008p1.html console fanboys should read this.
The 360 and the PS3 are completely different architectures. So that would be comparing apples to oranges, then.
The only thing that matters is how streamlined a developer can make his code run on one system. For example, doing something trivial on the PS3 might require 400 CPU cycles while the same thing might take twice that amount on the 360. Even if the CPUs both ran at a given clock speed, had the same amount of memory and cache available, etc, it doesn't mean that the PS3's CPU is twice as powerful. It's up to the developer to try and pull that total down as much as possible or do things a completely different way.
It's the reason that straight ports from one platform to another always run like crap on the platform they're ported to - Halo ran well on the XBox, but even on PCs several generations ahead in hardware terms, many of the XBox's features had to be emulated, which is what caused the massive slowdown.
-
It's good presentation but I'm honestly not all that impressed with what it shows in terms of content and graphics. We're about two generations beyond where graphics could differentiate one game from another anyway and showing a pre-rendered special effects shot, that says nothing about gameplay, doesn't really make me jump. And the whole not yet released thing still comes to mind.
*hint* That's not prerendered.
Watch the latest 1up show. They say the trailer = game graphics. Furthermore, from the "behind the scenes" of the trailer at Gamespot, according to Epic, everything you see in the trailer can be executed in game, except for when Marcus is lying on his face.
Well, I try not to waste my time watching the commercial-cum-TV shows that cover this sort of thing, so I don't have that level of expertise. My comment still stands in full. Game graphics can, and often are, prerendered, and that commercial does not show one moment of actual gameplay. Even if you can pull off the same style moves, you can't do it from that perspective and there's nothing saying the graphics will even look the same. And I'm not saying anything one way or another about the graphics; they're expected to be good these days and I'm not saying that Gears of War will necessarily dissapoint. I'm saying that the commercial itself doesn't really give me anything to go on. And remember, killer graphics != killer app, and killer app is what you said it would be.
note: i said it looked good from a presentation perspective, nicely composed, everything.
we'll see if it's ingame or not when it comes to release time, and actual gameplay ensues. :nod:
http://au.xbox360.ign.com/articles/744/744008p1.html console fanboys should read this.
Go watch any of the latest footage and you'll see that it is indeed in game.
Or, compare if you will, this screenshot (thank you broken NDAs!)
(http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/8150/z4ja1.jpg)
-
I've told you before not to put any faith in Development shots.........
-
I just said, that's not a dev shot. That was taken by a website who broke NDAs by putting up a bunch of screenshots they took of the campaign mode.
-
I think it's worth pointing out the importance of a) level of detail modelling/texturing and b) actual gameplay views for this sort of thing.
Sure, we might have this lovely close up shot of an, er, ugly cartoonish bloke as seen above, but will we ever see that ingame? Of course not. It's just like if you get your actual gameplay shot of, say, PGR3 (3?) on the 360 and compare it to the Xbox ones, and there's very little difference. In certain examples it's clearer than others - say texture resolution in an FPS, when you do get close to the walls, etc - but often this level of detail is completely meaningless, and doubly so when it comes to the actual merits of the game. Hell, I remember FIFA2001 boasting highly impressive detailed player faces.... in a special celebration 'mode' view.
By all reports Gears of War is a very good game; exceptional even. But does the difference between, say, Unreal 2 and Unreal 3 engine graphics really matter in that?
-
I think it's worth pointing out the importance of a) level of detail modelling/texturing and b) actual gameplay views for this sort of thing.
Sure, we might have this lovely close up shot of an, er, ugly cartoonish bloke as seen above, but will we ever see that ingame? Of course not. It's just like if you get your actual gameplay shot of, say, PGR3 (3?) on the 360 and compare it to the Xbox ones, and there's very little difference. In certain examples it's clearer than others - say texture resolution in an FPS, when you do get close to the walls, etc - but often this level of detail is completely meaningless, and doubly so when it comes to the actual merits of the game. Hell, I remember FIFA2001 boasting highly impressive detailed player faces.... in a special celebration 'mode' view.
By all reports Gears of War is a very good game; exceptional even. But does the difference between, say, Unreal 2 and Unreal 3 engine graphics really matter in that?
By all acounts you get close enough to the character IN THE GAME that the sort of detail seen above can be seen in game.
And PGR3 not looking better than PGR2??? What the hell are you smoking?!!?
-
I think it's worth pointing out the importance of a) level of detail modelling/texturing and b) actual gameplay views for this sort of thing.
Sure, we might have this lovely close up shot of an, er, ugly cartoonish bloke as seen above, but will we ever see that ingame? Of course not. It's just like if you get your actual gameplay shot of, say, PGR3 (3?) on the 360 and compare it to the Xbox ones, and there's very little difference. In certain examples it's clearer than others - say texture resolution in an FPS, when you do get close to the walls, etc - but often this level of detail is completely meaningless, and doubly so when it comes to the actual merits of the game. Hell, I remember FIFA2001 boasting highly impressive detailed player faces.... in a special celebration 'mode' view.
By all reports Gears of War is a very good game; exceptional even. But does the difference between, say, Unreal 2 and Unreal 3 engine graphics really matter in that?
By all acounts you get close enough to the character IN THE GAME that the sort of detail seen above can be seen in game.
And PGR3 not looking better than PGR2??? What the hell are you smoking?!!?
http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/pgr3/pgr3.htm
-
That's a pretty bad excuse for a review.
-
Yes, but only because of your title.
-
Troll much?
-
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot.
-
That's a pretty bad excuse for a review.
And yet you fail to offer any reason for that view. Possibly becase the pictures stand alone for themselves (http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/pgr3/pgrbox.htm) in indicating how fundamentally little difference all the detail in the world makes.
It's simple, really. Increasing polygon counts, etc, can make a substantial fine grained difference. But the range at which that difference is truly perceptible is usually far closer than any useful gameplaying view. Now, you said "By all acounts you get close enough to the character IN THE GAME that the sort of detail seen above can be seen in game."; what possible use would such a view be? How could you possibly play the game with that gurning muppet filling over half the view?
We've already reached, I think, the tipping point where graphics aren't important in defining a games value. That's not to say you won't get lots of muppets going 'ooh, specular facial pores!'; that's to say that graphics no longer alter gameplay to the extent where they can make a bad game better or a good game worse (if, indeed, they ever did). I would say the success of both PS3 and 360 is not dependent on graphics, but on what the games actually offer to players (not just viewers). The uncanny valley, in my opinion, has been reached and - perversely perhaps - we're now going back to the stage of actually having to value gameplay.
-
Actually it's because I didn't want to bombard the board with screenshots.
-
Actually it's because I didn't want to bombard the board with screenshots.
( :O )
By all means please post an actual gameplay screenshot of PGR3 as you would see it when playing. I think you'll see exactly my point.
-
I gotta say, I am thouroughly dissapointed when upcoming games only show pre-rendered movies as an incentive, on PC gamer or XBOX magazine for instance, it's like they cant rely on their own engine to speak for itself........
Case in Point is............Um,
I forget but it happens every day, Splinter cell i think did it a while back :nervous:
-
For the last time. That Gears of War advert is not prerendered. You can see some serious aliasing right at the beginning with the buildings against the sky, as well as some clipping from the smoke.
-
No i love Gears of War, dont get me wrong.............I'm still thinking here.
*cogs turn...............slowly*
-
Aldo raised a very good point. Back when you were talking about things like the jump from the Atari/Commodore to the NES era, the latter to the SNES/Genesis era, the latter to the N64/PS1 era, and (to a lesser extent) the latter to the PS2/XBox/Gamecube era, there really were substantial expanded gameplay possibilities with each new level of technology. (And, like he also said, even that doesn't always add up; as graphically primitive as Goldeneye is when compared to Halo, you're still looking at the same basic console FPS mechanic of gameplay.) Mario64, Final Fantasy VII, and Ocarina of Time are all examples of this to a certain extent. But as of the previous generation, which reached a certain plateau of graphical clarity and framerate smoothness, the real difference you can make to actual gameplay by adding more horsepower seems to drop off. Now, I'm not saying that there's no difference whatsoever; certainly, greater physics-processing abilities does allow for more varied gameplay mechanics, but when it comes down to it, you're still setting them in the same gametypes. You can't exactly re-invent the console FPS or racing game with a faster machine, after all. In a way, I think gaming innovation has become more important than ever; games like Spore really are the best things that can happen to the industry.
-
First Gears review (put up early, removed from site navigation, but still in the site)
http://www.g4tv.com/pile_player.aspx?video_key=13749
5/5.
This part focuses on the multiplayer, but the score is for both SP and MP.
-
Now there's a reliable source.
In addition, while I don't know anything about the story and how those aspects of the singleplayer game handle, that multiplayer fragfest really does look like 5 out of 5.
-
Yeah, I know G4 tv is teh suxors, but you gotta deal with what you get before the official embargo ends at 9 am tommorow.
-
I'm hoping this game comes out for Vista if its singleplayer gets good reviews.
-
I wouldn't be surprised...
-
Of course you wouldn't, you know just as I do what the D3D10 optimizations in Vista mean.
-
I was actually thinking about Halo and how many sales it has garnished on the PC despite being an Xbox port.
-
No, I'm pretty sure you were thinking about the fact that Vista is primarily designed to handle the 360 > Vista game ports in the easiest and fastest way possible, so that the game market domination would be as effective as it hasn't been so far.
-
Now there's a reliable source.
In addition, while I don't know anything about the story and how those aspects of the singleplayer game handle, that multiplayer fragfest really does look like 5 out of 5.
All the previews of GoW have been sufficiently glowing to indicate 5/5 (or in the 90s; I think out of '5' scores are largely useless) marks are the norm.
I'd expect MS to pay fat sacks of cash to keep GoW 360-exclusive.......for about a year.
-
They're publishing...
-
Gamespot's review is up early as well:
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/video_player/popup.php?sid=6161197&pid=
No score is given, but It sounds AAA.
-
Gamespot gave it a 9.6 according to Cnet.
http://reviews.cnet.com/Gears_of_War_Xbox_360/4505-11457_7-31414802.html
Nice!
I'm thinking the only game that will review better this year is Twilight Princess.
-
Now there's a reliable source.
In addition, while I don't know anything about the story and how those aspects of the singleplayer game handle, that multiplayer fragfest really does look like 5 out of 5.
All the previews of GoW have been sufficiently glowing to indicate 5/5 (or in the 90s; I think out of '5' scores are largely useless) marks are the norm.
I'd expect MS to pay fat sacks of cash to keep GoW 360-exclusive.......for about a year.
Took Halo what, 3 years ? I give GoW 2 years. Just enough to milk the 360 market. But leave it too long, as with Halo, and none will care about it anymore.
-
Actually until recently, Halo PC was on the top 10 list of best selling PC games.
-
**** knows why, it's one of the worst conversions in history.
-
No kidding.
Anyway, I think it's safe to call Gears of War a killer app now.
Gamespot : Jeff Gersttman
Gears of War is an outstanding technical achievement, but in addition to looking and sounding amazing, it's a seriously awesome action game.
The Good: Stellar graphics reset the bar for what consoles can do visually; great soundtrack and killer sound effects; satisfying gameplay in single-player mode; very addictive online play; best use of a chainsaw in any game, ever.
The Bad: Story could have been a bit more fleshed out; difficulty could have used some slight tuning.
-Link: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/acti...ar/review.html (be careful, first paragraph contains plot (spoilers) I'm told)
1up.com: Dan Hsu
-(my summary)Despite the shortcomings and flaws too many reasons to give it a 10 because overall quality and awesomeness
-Link: http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3154958
IGN: Jonathan Miller
Presentation: 9.5
Epic has created an immersive universe that will probably turn into a sequel, a movie and a licensed breakfast cereal. Amazing cinematic flair, gritty attitude and a one-of-a-kind artistic style.
Graphics: 10
The most beautiful game on the Xbox 360. Amazing attention to detail and vibrant, diverse environments make for a feast for the eyes, even on a standard-definition set.
Sound: 10
Virtually flawless. An excellent musical score, awesome atmospheric audio cues and spot-on sound effects. Crank it up.
Gameplay: 9.0
Simple, accessible and tremendously fun, and that was before the chainsaw. In close, the combat gets wonky, but that doesn't take away from the awesome new cover mechanic and exploding head shots.
Lasting Appeal: 7.5
The single-player/co-op campaign is over too soon, although bumping the difficulty to Insane just about triples the length. For what Versus lacks in gamemodes, it makes up for in fun.
Overall(not an average): 9.4/10
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/744/744356p1.html
Teamxbox: Will Tuttle
Gameplay: The stop 'n pop mechanic works well, although hardcore shooter fans might want to up the difficulty for more of a challenge. The action is intense and very well-paced. 9.3/10
Graphics: This is by far the best looking video game we've ever seen. 10/10
Audio: Crank up your surround sound, rev your buzz saw, and feel the adrenaline pumping through your veins. 9.8/10
Longevity: The intense, brutal multiplayer modes will keep you coming back for a long time. Online co-op is lot of fun. 9.5/10
Innovation: While there are some cool weapons, most of them fall into the "old standby" category. The active reload and roadie run mechanics are nice touches. 9/10
Overall: 9.6
Link:http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360...ars-of-War/p1/
OXM: 10/10
XPlay: 5/5
Playboy: 4 bunnies out of 4 bunnies
Yahoo Games: 4.5/5 Link: http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamerevi...&page=0&eid=-1
-
I actually LIKE Xplay reviews. Better than any of the other G4 attempts.
-
I'd ignore OXM, though - the same magazine that was once sent a complaint by a developer because they hadn't actually played their game before reviewing it (and scoring it highly). :)
-
Mhm I read Gamespot's review, said there was little in the way of story, and that it's mostly hiding behind a rock and shooting stuff, or the occasional chainsaw.
While it is very pretty and the deathfragmatch is there (probably one of the best concepts I've ever seen), I'm not really interested in a game where that's what the whole package entails.
-
when will people learn that they need writers and a GOOD story.
-
when will people learn that they need writers and a GOOD story.
Did you really expect a good story looking at it? We all, I would think, know Epics' strengths by now, and they certainly aren't believable characterisation and convincing dialogue :D
It's a post-apocalyptic shooty thing that does post apocalyptic shootiness extremely well by all accounts, and if you want a good and pretty looking post-apocalyptic shooty thing for the xbox360 then it's the one you'll get.
I have to admit being interested in how it'll be rated vs Resistance on the PS3, because both seem to be covering the same basic ground (although arguably it's a mite unfair to rate 1st vs 2nd gen, that's the market it's in).
-
when will people learn that they need writers and a GOOD story.
Why do people place so much fuss over a story ? Tetris didn't need a story. Street Fighter 2 didn't need a story. Gran Turismo didn't need a story.
Don't get me wrong, if it's a story driven game it needs to be good if it's all about playability screw the story.
-
when will people learn that they need writers and a GOOD story.
Why do people place so much fuss over a story ? Tetris didn't need a story. Street Fighter 2 didn't need a story. Gran Turismo didn't need a story.
Don't get me wrong, if it's a story driven game it needs to be good if it's all about playability screw the story.
Well, a story is generally regarded as the 'driving force' for modern games of a certain ilk, adding a dramatic context and meaning to events that transpire. For certain genres such a thing is self evident - sports/competition being one example, where it obvious why you're trying to win - but for others it needs to be inserted and thus takes more importance.... otherwise the likes of an FPS end up being little more than a botmatch.
EDIT; 8/10 in Eurogamer (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=69696&page=2); I don't trust IGN or Gamespy (dunno the rest), because they historically overscore everything. This quote indicates why it's not a killer app for me personally. Of course, I only ever played 1 console FPS - and haven't wanted to try anything since.
But, let's face it, looks aren't everything. Cutting through the bull****, on a purely gaming level Gears of War is not doing anything extraordinary or new on any level. A few novel camera and control tweaks aside, we're in pretty familiar territory with a broadly well-established load-out of weapons, fighting a familiar battle against enemies that for all their gloriously elaborate alien exterior might as well be humans for all the differences they represent in reality. These are AI routines we're well versed in, and familiar duck and cover tactics that we're used to from other games, and, yes, they work to good effect in Gears of War, but let's not pretend that we're wallowing in the future of entertainment. What we have here is an extremely competent action game that's as polished and refined as it could be, and is therefore very enjoyable. But if Epic had applied the same widescreen scope and ambition to the gameplay as it did to the engine we'd be much more excited than we are.
-
Yeah, that's how I'd describe it as well.
-
Yeah, that's how I'd describe it as well.
I didn't think you had an Xbox to play it on?
-
From what I've seen obviously.
I refuse to get a 360 out of pure principle.
-
Your loss. I have niggles with the Eurogamer review (not bringing anything new... for a first person shooter that would be true, but as a third person shooter, it does a lot for the genre), but it balances out the 10/10 that 1up gave the game.
I tend to trust Gamespot reviews the most personally.
EDIT:
Actually, I like the Gametrailers video reviews quite a lot.
-
Gamespot?!!
-
!!!
Mostly, except for PDZ.
-
Your loss.
No, no.
My gain.
-
Your loss.
No, no.
My gain.
Ooooh, snap.
Looks okay, but since the story & single-player aren't all that great, and i'm not a big fan of online console play [considering my modem just happens to be the one ****ing model the 360 doesn't like], i'm going to wait a few months, or maybe just rent it.
-
Uh, the reviews say the story isn't original, but the single player is great, especially co-op.
EDIT:
And this is just about the coolest thing I have ever seen in a game...
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p299/jet1911/gow.gif)
The amount of movies GameTrailers has for this is just REDICULOUS!
http://www.gametrailers.com/
It's like the first 5 pages of the front catalog.
-
What, going flush against a wall? Whoopdee-****ing-doo, Basil!
Every review i've found has spoken of a less-than-stellar singleplayer & story, both of which I look for in games I buy. It looks nice, but I like substance more than graphics, which most probably just stop noticing after the first 10 minutes.
-
Personally I'm not all that enamored or impressed with the hiding and popping out to shoot.
Metal Gear Solid did that three times already.
-
Good job missing the point. He dodged that missile by going into cover. I could care less about going into cover, but that's flawless timing.
-
I wasn't trying to relate to any point.
The image just simply reminded me how much that part is a ripoff of Metal Gear Solid, and how that whole aspect of the gameplay doesn't impress me.
-
Ripoff of MGS? You're kidding right?
MGS isn't anwhere near as smooth moving from cover to cover. Nor did it invent the idea.
-
Actually it's much more smoother than Gears of War, from what I see in the gameplay videos.
-
Yeah, now I know you are talking out of your arse.
As far as story is concerned:
http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=7602196&publicUserId=5345401
-
Considering I was ranked 24th player out of a few million regarding the ranking in Sons of Liberty, you'll be the one doing the ass talking.
I'm sure the story may have "potential", but like the man says, the game makes it trivial. When the story is trivial, it holds no interest for me, nor should it to anyone who values their mind.
A lot of games offer good shooting. This one is just simply the newest and prettiest one.
But nothing more.
-
Considering I was ranked 24th player out of a few million regarding the ranking in Sons of Liberty, you'll be the one doing the ass talking.
I'm sure the story may have "potential", but like the man says, the game makes it trivial. When the story is trivial, it holds no interest for me, nor should it to anyone who values their mind.
A lot of games offer good shooting. This one is just simply the newest and prettiest one.
But nothing more.
1st - the MGS games have really hokey in game animations. This is a fact. Deal with it.
2nd - the story is trivialized because the gameplay stands so well on its own.
3rd - MGS has the most contrived storytelling of any game, and while the cinematics are great, the actual plot sucks.
-
Deepblue: Hard at work earning his user title..
well, someone's got to stand up for them.
-
I'm reading this thread, and I'm cringing.
-
Considering I was ranked 24th player out of a few million regarding the ranking in Sons of Liberty, you'll be the one doing the ass talking.
I'm sure the story may have "potential", but like the man says, the game makes it trivial. When the story is trivial, it holds no interest for me, nor should it to anyone who values their mind.
A lot of games offer good shooting. This one is just simply the newest and prettiest one.
But nothing more.
1st - the MGS games have really hokey in game animations. This is a fact. Deal with it.
2nd - the story is trivialized because the gameplay stands so well on its own.
3rd - MGS has the most contrived storytelling of any game, and while the cinematics are great, the actual plot sucks.
and halo was any better?.. i mean, i /liked/ halo, but it had its own issues, MGS series, particularly one and three, had a nice epic feeling to it, Hideo Kojima has a flair for cinematics.
MGS2 had serious gameplay issues, both were, the gameplay/cinematic ratio, too much of the latter, and another was, well... raiden.
as for MGS3's plot, i think it was leaning towards playing off at 60's spy thrillers, and james bond, it was set in the cold war for pete's sake!
hell, i can tell you that Ghost Recon, as purdy and graphically sweet as it is, its story was pretty much what i'd expect out of hollywood these days..
the Release title, Perfect Dark zero, failed to live up to the gameplay of its predaccessor, actually, it looked more like a tech demo than a game when one first lays hands on it, and plays.
the only current 360 game i enjoyed was "condemned" it had a CSI/FEAR element to it.. horribly short, however, but smacking people about with a pipe makes up for it. :P
quoting certain french people in a certain old BBC Comedy, "listen to me carefully, i shall say this only once"..
Deepblue, you take games waaaaaayyyy too seriously, they're only games for pete's sake.
the fact is, all first generation console games suck.. the real cream of the PS3's crop won't come until the 2nd or 3rd generation of games for it. same with the 360, we're only just starting to see the opening shots of the 2nd generation of games, gears of war is only one such thing..
as for going up flush against the wall, rent/buy splinter cell sometime, it's been done before. ;)
-
I think kill.switch and even Winback on the N64 did the whole 'go flush' thing ages ago, too.
To be honest, I doubt there's been a single non-RPG game with a truly great story (and even then, they're rare in RPGs; KoToR 1 is the only that comes to my mind, and even then it's a well told but generic version of Star Wars: A New Hope).
EDIT; there have been some good 1st generation games; Mario 64 springs to mind, or Super Mario World on the SNES (not buying a Master System, Megadrive, PS1, etc at launch, I'm not sure about their launch lineup). Of course, nowadays it seems games are measured on presentation - show over substance - which is the only area where you could reasonably expect 1st generation to fall short.
-
I think kill.switch and even Winback on the N64 did the whole 'go flush' thing ages ago, too.
To be honest, I doubt there's been a single non-RPG game with a truly great story (and even then, they're rare in RPGs; KoToR 1 is the only that comes to my mind, and even then it's a well told but generic version of Star Wars: A New Hope).
that's reaching far back, but yeah, they did that too. Kotor 1 had a great story, it was well executed..
Kotor 2 had a pretty good story too, but fell short when it came to character development, and it lacked overall polish, primarily due to lucasarts rushing obsidian to make it in 12 months.
the Fallout series had a good story, due to it being somewhat unique, the post-apoc setting of it helped it along immensely.
-
To be honest, I doubt there's been a single non-RPG game with a truly great story
Blah blah, Silent Hill series, blah blah blah Perimeter, ramble ramble Legacy of Kain
...What I meant to say is, that's a bit of an unfair generalisation. I agree they're extremely rare, and RPGs do tend to focus on story more readily, but if KotOR is the par for 'truly great' then I must disagree.
-
Secret of Mana ftw.
-
To be honest, I doubt there's been a single non-RPG game with a truly great story
Blah blah, Silent Hill series, blah blah blah Perimeter, ramble ramble Legacy of Kain
...What I meant to say is, that's a bit of an unfair generalisation. I agree they're extremely rare, and RPGs do tend to focus on story more readily, but if KotOR is the par for 'truly great' then I must disagree.
I'm not sure KotOR is truly great, it's just the best example I can think of. The more I think of it, the less I think any game has a truly great story, because of the interactive nature of the medium; certainly I've never played anything approaching the level of a good (nevermind a classic) book.
-
Oh, absolutely, but I think that's the thing. They're different mediums: comparing them seems to me to be a pretty fruitless endeavour. I mean, you could say, 'Well, that game's story was pretty cool, but it wasn't as good as so-and-so book.' But what's the point?
-
Oh, absolutely, but I think that's the thing. They're different mediums: comparing them seems to me to be a pretty fruitless endeavour. I mean, you could say, 'Well, that game's story was pretty cool, but it wasn't as good as so-and-so book.' But what's the point?
Strriving to do better?
-
My point is the book argument pretty much brings the entire gaming industry to its knees in this regard. Books are designed specifically to tell a story, games aren't. This doesn't mean there's never been a good story in a game, it just means they can't tell a good story in the same way a book can, which is why bringing the other industry into it is essentially meaningless.
It's the same deal with films. Because it's a visual medium and each piece is compressed into about two hours, they can't tell a story in the same way as a book, but that certainly doesn't mean you can't have a good story in a movie.
-
My point is the book argument pretty much brings the entire gaming industry to its knees in this regard. Books are designed specifically to tell a story, games aren't. This doesn't mean there's never been a good story in a game, it just means they can't tell a good story in the same way a book can, which is why bringing the other industry into it is essentially meaningless.
It's the same deal with films. Because it's a visual medium and each piece is compressed into about two hours, they can't tell a story in the same way as a book, but that certainly doesn't mean you can't have a good story in a movie.
True, but I don't believe games are incapable of matching the story quality - if not the precise nature of the telling - of a book.
-
Considering I was ranked 24th player out of a few million regarding the ranking in Sons of Liberty, you'll be the one doing the ass talking.
I'm sure the story may have "potential", but like the man says, the game makes it trivial. When the story is trivial, it holds no interest for me, nor should it to anyone who values their mind.
A lot of games offer good shooting. This one is just simply the newest and prettiest one.
But nothing more.
1st - the MGS games have really hokey in game animations. This is a fact. Deal with it.
2nd - the story is trivialized because the gameplay stands so well on its own.
3rd - MGS has the most contrived storytelling of any game, and while the cinematics are great, the actual plot sucks.
1 - The animations are perfection at every turn.
2 - The story is what makes the game go around, and so are the cutscenes. The gameplay is actually an "inbetween" hassle that you go through between cutscenes, however, because it is such a GOOD hassle (both complex and perfectly executed), we love it very much.
3 - Just because you didn't understand the story, that doesn't mean it isn't sufficiently awesome. I understand how it is for you to call it "stupid" - there are a lot of people who did that, and they did it because they didn't understand it.
You have no ground on attacking MGS on the points you're trying to make. MGS has different flaws, but you don't know what they are because you aren't criticizing the game for its real shortcomings, you're criticizing it because it's not on the Xbox but on the competing platform.
Which makes your opinion not only void, but also spoken like a true advertising moron.
-
I'll let you guys know how it is over the weekend.
An awful lot of armchair reviewing going on here...
-
Considering I was ranked 24th player out of a few million regarding the ranking in Sons of Liberty, you'll be the one doing the ass talking.
I'm sure the story may have "potential", but like the man says, the game makes it trivial. When the story is trivial, it holds no interest for me, nor should it to anyone who values their mind.
A lot of games offer good shooting. This one is just simply the newest and prettiest one.
But nothing more.
1st - the MGS games have really hokey in game animations. This is a fact. Deal with it.
2nd - the story is trivialized because the gameplay stands so well on its own.
3rd - MGS has the most contrived storytelling of any game, and while the cinematics are great, the actual plot sucks.
1 - The animations are perfection at every turn.
2 - The story is what makes the game go around, and so are the cutscenes. The gameplay is actually an "inbetween" hassle that you go through between cutscenes, however, because it is such a GOOD hassle (both complex and perfectly executed), we love it very much.
3 - Just because you didn't understand the story, that doesn't mean it isn't sufficiently awesome. I understand how it is for you to call it "stupid" - there are a lot of people who did that, and they did it because they didn't understand it.
You have no ground on attacking MGS on the points you're trying to make. MGS has different flaws, but you don't know what they are because you aren't criticizing the game for its real shortcomings, you're criticizing it because it's not on the Xbox but on the competing platform.
Which makes your opinion not only void, but also spoken like a true advertising moron.
Spoken like a true MGS fanboy.
I understand the stories perfectly well, which is why I know they suck. I play MGS for the gameplay, not the story.
-
Dear sir,
Your opinions do not coincide with mine. Please change them to suit my convenience or I will call you names and glare at your username for an unspecified amount of time.
-
You bastard, you! I rebut your statement with my own view and a conjured apocryphal story!
-
Spoken like a true MGS fanboy.
I understand the stories perfectly well, which is why I know they suck. I play MGS for the gameplay, not the story.
Of course I'm an MGS fanboy. They're great games, and you absolutely have no shred of reason to call them otherwise.
If you understand the stories, why don't you tell me what they were about and the meaning behind them then? See, the gameplay is the least attractive part of the game, although monumental and awesome. If you understood everything, you'll have no problem detailing it out.
Dear sir,
Your opinions do not coincide with mine. Please change them to suit my convenience or I will call you names and glare at your username for an unspecified amount of time.
No, it's:
"I will call you names and glare at your username for an unspecified amount of time because your opinions are based on nothing coherent or anything resembling on any stretch of the imagination as "sane"."
Get the difference?
-
There is no way to deny that this game is seriously beautiful though.
(http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4491/gow1qt9.jpg)
(http://img474.imageshack.us/img474/3622/gow3ex2.jpg)
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7199/gow6zw0.jpg)
(http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a29/dark1x/gears2.jpg)
(http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a29/dark1x/gears3.jpg)
-
So? I don't know about you, but after about 10 minutes of playing a game, I don't really notice the graphics at all, because i'm, y'know, playing the game.
-
It's called atmosphere.
-
It's called atmosphere.
you can have atmosphere without the severe eyecandy, you know.
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better. See Half Life 2 and Resident Evil 4. HL2s story wasn't great, but the atmosphere made up for it.
-
I'm sorry.
Screenshots don't answer my question.
Now that we've established your opinions mean absolutely nothing, we'll always refer back to this thread to point that out.
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better. See Half Life 2 and Resident Evil 4. HL2s story wasn't great, but the atmosphere made up for it.
two words: System Shock
-
I'm sorry.
Screenshots don't answer my question.
Now that we've established your opinions mean absolutely nothing, we'll always refer back to this thread to point that out.
I'm sorry, but you didn't have a question to be answered. Nor have you tried to be civil.
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better.
Read a book.
-
deepblue, word for the wise, people wouldn't be calling you a corporate shill (your title), if you got giddy over games that weren't exclusively on microsoft consoles.
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better.
Read a book.
Point.
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better. See Half Life 2 and Resident Evil 4. HL2s story wasn't great, but the atmosphere made up for it.
Actually, sound builds atmosphere. You can have all the eyecandy in the world and it still wouldn't matter if you haven't got a good soundtrack and sound effects to back it up. Games with no eyecandy but with a good sound selection can be extremelly engaging.
-
Can i just say sound and visuals do nothing except present the desingers pre-visualised world. The original Zork Games were great becaus they gave you something to comprehend for yourself whilest retaining interactive genius-ness.
(real word?, dont care :p)
-
Eyecandy builds atmosphere better. See Half Life 2 and Resident Evil 4. HL2s story wasn't great, but the atmosphere made up for it.
Actually, sound builds atmosphere. You can have all the eyecandy in the world and it still wouldn't matter if you haven't got a good soundtrack and sound effects to back it up. Games with no eyecandy but with a good sound selection can be extremelly engaging.
a game is nothing without sound..
Shodan Taunting you in System shock, the groans of the many and their cries of "run away", etc.
the slow shuffling of a zombie in a game like doom 3
the chitter of a headcrab in HL2.
the scuttling of a creeper in condemned, which has you looking all over the place in the dark looking for where that sound came from.
-
I'm sorry.
Screenshots don't answer my question.
Now that we've established your opinions mean absolutely nothing, we'll always refer back to this thread to point that out.
I'm sorry, but you didn't have a question to be answered. Nor have you tried to be civil.
I'm sorry, but the question was clearly marked with a question mark at the end of the sentence. We will add illiteracy to the list of your flaws.
-
« Last Edit: November 08, 2006, 06:53:16 PM by BlackDove »
Oh ho ho.
-
« Last Edit: November 09, 2006, 01:48:23 AM by Deepblue »
Oh ho ho.
Your post comes a day after my edit. Plenty of time to read my post.
So not only are you illiterate, you don't seem to be able to tell time as well. No concept of time. We will add that to your list of brain deficiencies.
-
Oh, for ****s sake, you two grow up. How old are you, twelve?
Fair enough, I'm not immune from being a dick in these types of thread. But I've never descended to the level of scrabbling twattitude I see here before me. Jeebus.
-
Yes, and I'm sure your parents are very proud of you.
I just don't care. Getting the shill tangled up in my web of retarded-ness just passes the boredom for the most part. The emanating bonus is just simply having that justified by each consecutive proof or stupidity he posts.
-
Yes, and I'm sure your parents are very proud of you.
My parents are very proud of me, in fact, although I'm not sure why you mention it.
You're looking just as shill worthy, though......
-
If not worse....
-
Oh no. I've been so dramatically beneath myself I have turned into a shill. And I have bystanders to point that out to me. NOEZ!
Give me a ****ing break.
I wouldn't even be posting here if the Microsoft employee wasn't trying to push their ****ty merchandise here.
-
alright deepblue, Blackdove, take it to PM..