Support NeoGAF

[JCBossman]

I will say that I think a missed opportunity here for Sony to better drive home the value of BD for games is that they haven't used it to create compilations of 1st party PS2 series on one disc. Get all the Jak games on one disc, all the R&C games on their own disc, GT, SOCOM, etc. Or mix it up and create "Best of" discs.

That a great idea, too bad they didn't do this with DVD's for music, I want ONE DVD with EVERY Pink Floyd Album.

 

[AdmiralViscen]

LOL

 

[rothbart]

But do you guys think removing Blu-ray and replacing it with DVD would really drop the price $200? I almost think it would make the system look more expensive because at this point you've got the Cell Processor and Blu-ray which are two big, new technologies... then you've got stuff like the larger hard drive and built-in wireless (which for whatever reason is still $99 for the 360). Most of those latter things aren't really that expensive, but Blu-ray and the Cell processor are. They more justify the higher price (don't mistake that for justifying their inclusion in the console in Blu-ray's case).

I'm just saying it's easier for me to understand the $200 price different with both of those technologies in there... Are we saying that if we removed Blu-ray and dropped the price $100, it would make a big difference? Maybe to a degree, but not a landslide in my opinion.

I think Sony made a decision now (as in at launch) that will matter much more, down the road. And hopefully by then, there will be 4x BD drives in the consoles (sucks for us early adopters, but loading speed is an issue). Part of me says Sony did the right thing by not fracturing the install base with DVD-based consoles and Blu-ray-based consoles... and I think before this gen is over, we'll benefit nicely from storage capacities well in excess of DVD9. All the PS3s will support this.

 

[fortified_concept]

And that means what? Does that mean you won't be getting next-gen games on smaller media discs? No, of course not. The compromise wasn't made within the hardware, as traditionally done, but it was made on price. That price has and will continue to affect PS3's chances of long term success. Next-gen gameplay isn't about strict disc size limitations, because that's thinking purely from a content perspective. The limitations in the capability of the console being reduced (more horsepower, better usability for users and developers) is far more important than how much a single disc can store.


Why wouldn't it? What can you really say is absolutely better for games: size of a single disc and the possibility that the user has to swap discs, or making your platform more accessible to more users and therefore more palatable to publishers & developers to risk making games for those users? More users is always a better choice, because, after all, this is still a business.

Next-gen gaming doesn't just mean better-looking. Better playing and looking games don't need Blu Ray-sized discs. The definition of next-gen and what is important to the end-user is already changing. One needs only to look at Wii's or X360's success to understand that. The vast majority of people don't really give a shit about the size of the disc. Oh, they'll spout off the bullet point of how PS3 can have 50GB discs, sure. But they won't care about that once you give them a game and they're having fun with it. Once they're enjoying it, specs mean nothing. What's really preventing those platforms from thriving for the next five to six years? Nothing.

Too many people are suckin' down that bullshit about Blu Ray being necessary for the games of two or more years down the line without even thinking about what they're agreeing with. Someone can come in and say, how are you going to get those next-gen graphics onto a DVD in a year or so? Right...let's wait a year or so and see how PS3 is at the bottom of the hill while the masses are 'suffering' with shitty ol' DVDs on their PC, Wii, and X360, shall we?

From the looks of it Blu-Ray is already useful for many games and it's pretty obvious it'll become necessary in a couple of years just like DVD games replaced CDs after a couple of years of PS2's life. And yes not forcing developers to cut back on their games features because of important hardware limitations is better for gaming.

Also, yes multiple discs could do the trick for some games but the real bullshit here is the denial from some folks that there are already capacity problems with certain X360 games. Didn't some guy from Epic admitted that some time ago? And btw Wii should not be a part of this discussion. For its tech Wii's disc capacity is perfect. The problem lies with HD consoles.

 

[Mifune]

I will say that I think a missed opportunity here for Sony to better drive home the value of BD for games is that they haven't used it to create compilations of 1st party PS2 series on one disc. Get all the Jak games on one disc, all the R&C games on their own disc, GT, SOCOM, etc. Or mix it up and create "Best of" discs.

WOW. I'd like to think that toward the end of this generation (perish the thought!) we will see stuff like that. I would buy the crap out of those games, even the series I already own on PS2.

 

[Lince]

I will say that I think a missed opportunity here for Sony to better drive home the value of BD for games is that they haven't used it to create compilations of 1st party PS2 series on one disc. Get all the Jak games on one disc, all the R&C games on their own disc, GT, SOCOM, etc. Or mix it up and create "Best of" discs.

Too bad software emulation destroyed this whole PS2 compilations on BD thing...

 

[fortified_concept]

Too bad software emulation destroyed this whole PS2 compilations on BD thing...

what

 

[MightyHedgehog]

But do you guys think removing Blu-ray and replacing it with DVD would really drop the price $200? I almost think it would make the system look more expensive because at this point you've got the Cell Processor and Blu-ray which are two big, new technologies... then you've got stuff like the larger hard drive and built-in wireless (which for whatever reason is still $99 for the 360). Most of those latter things aren't really that expensive, but Blu-ray and the Cell processor are. They more justify the higher price (don't mistake that for justifying their inclusion in the console in Blu-ray's case).

It would've made the system less expensive and more available at Japanese and NA launches, certainly. $100 less is still $100 that won't need a year or so to drop down from for potential buyers...making the system more available to more users much more quickly. I highly doubt that Sony would've felt as compelled to include many things that they did on the $599 model if they weren't tied on the cost of goods, thanks to Blu Ray, in particular. They added things to the system to boost its worth...things that are cheap and go down incredibly low in cost in mass production very, very quickly. Otherwise, they would've offered those things (card reader, mem stick port, wi-fi, etc.) separately, as that makes them more money.

. . . and I think before this gen is over, we'll benefit nicely from storage capacities well in excess of DVD9. All the PS3s will support this.

Certainly, but those experiences will still be available to users of non-Blu Ray discs...though in multiple discs. Convenience (push format to profitability for Sony and no swapping for users) is what Blu Ray is about, and not much else, IMO.

From the looks of it Blu-Ray is already useful for many games and it pretty obvious it'll become necessary in a couple of years just like DVD games replaced CDs after a couple of years of PS2's life. And yes not forcing developers to cut back on their games features because of important hardware limitations is better for gaming.

Why are developers cutting back? Because they want to cut down to a single disc? Wow. Big deal. If Blu Ray didn't add the cost to consumers that it does, I'd completely agree with your thinking. But it does, so a lot of people aren't on the platform to give a shit about a relatively small benefit. Devs can easily live with multiple discs...especially if the userbase is bigger for the lack of extra cost that it incurs.

Also, yes multiple discs could do the trick for some games but the real bullshit here is the denial from some folks that there are already capacity problems with certain X360 games. Didn't some guy from Epic admitted that some time ago? And btw Wii should not be a part of this discussion. For its tech Wii's disc capacity is perfect. The problem lies with HD consoles.

Right, and that capacity limit prevented GoW from selling 3 million in three months. It prevented gamers from liking the game. It prevented the game from being good. Yep, you just can't have great games on DVD...nevermind having next-gen ones. ... Last I checked, HD or not, DVDs were doing fine on computers for a long time. Does that mean that future games might require the HDD to 'install' to gain the complete benefit of compression? Sure. Small price to pay for having greater success up front and rolling into the future.

 

[Lince]

what

compilations of Jak/Ratchet/GT games when half of them won't work on PS3?

http://faq.eu.playstation.com/bc/

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

compilations of Jak/Ratchet/GT games when half of them won't work on PS3?

http://faq.eu.playstation.com/bc/

Um....wouldn't you just retool them to higher PS3 specs for emulation like most compilations and anthologies do instead of just out and out depend on varied probability of working with just the sketchy embedded PS2 tech.

I mean you have the PS3 right there and are putting it all on PS3 Blu-ray from the get go.

 

[tahrikmili]

Jaffe is an idiot.
Who is he to comment on Blu-ray, when all he did for the PS3 is make a little 50 meg downloadable game ?

There, it has been said.

Who are *you* to comment on what he commented, have you done even *that*?

LOL

The hypocrisy.

 

[InterMoniker]

As a big fan ok Kojima, I'd say that it would be wise to wait for the actual game before drawing conclusions. MGS4 is gonna be, quite likely, an extremely linear game. We'll see if and how it would have been problematic to fit it on two or three DVD9.

We will have to wait and see, but judging from the trailer it looks non-linear in a big city.

From what I've seen thats what I think, plus he said there's more areas than just the middle east.

 

[Karma Kramer]

oh man I don't have time now... but I can't wait to read this thread when I get home

 

[kaching]

Too bad software emulation destroyed this whole PS2 compilations on BD thing...

That doesn't destroy the idea, it just requires more effort to make it work for certain compilations - a special version of the PS2 emulator that ships on the disc and works with those games. Some types of compilations would be just fine without this, so no reason to deep six the entire idea.

 

[OmniGamer]

Next-gen gaming doesn't just mean better-looking. Better playing and looking games don't need Blu Ray-sized discs.

I never said it was "needed", I said it having the added capacity isn't a hinderance to "next-gen gaming". Not ever game needs beyond DVD capacity...but for those developers that wish to go beyond DVD, why limit them?

The damn system isn't even 6 months old yet...prices go down...but you can't "upgrade" capacity. How hard is it to look at short-term expense vs. long-term benefit. Didn't Microsoft want to release the 360 with 256MB of RAM at first until develops kept asking for more RAM? I'm sure the benefit to having 512MB or RAM sure outweights the short term cost-cutting "benefits" that having 256MB of RAM would have shown. "Bu bu bu bu you can have next gen games with 256MB"...but I sure bet 512 doesn't hurt, does it?

 

[InterMoniker]

Simplifying the Blu-Ray issue into 'don't you want longer games?' IS spin. There is much more to the discussion than that.

Positives and negatives. If the whole thing was that black and white there would be no issue, period.

Okkkkkkkkkkk....... not just longer games but more content and story too whats negative about that? Oh yea the pricepoint yaaaaaaaaaaaaawn..................

 

[Oni Jazar]

I will say that I think a missed opportunity here for Sony to better drive home the value of BD for games is that they haven't used it to create compilations of 1st party PS2 series on one disc. Get all the Jak games on one disc, all the R&C games on their own disc, GT, SOCOM, etc. Or mix it up and create "Best of" discs.

This is *exactly* what I was expecting to happen with BD early on.

Remember when CD-ROMS launched for PCs? There were a ton of compliation stuff that made sense to have it on such high capacity discs.

Imagine if Konami released Dexluxe editions of Silent Hill or Metal Gear with ALL previous versions on ONE disc. *drool*

 

[----]

I think he's talking from a game developers standpoint, not from Sony Electronic's standpoint. It's pretty obvious that the main reason that Blu-ray was included was to sell high def movies. The cost of including Blu-ray right now grossly outweighs the benefit for games alone. If you wanted PS3 to be selling as well as PS2 did worldwide when it launched then the first thing you would have to do is remove the blu-ray drive. That is an intelligent answer.

 

[fortified_concept]

Right, and that capacity limit prevented GoW from selling 3 million in three months. It prevented gamers from liking the game. It prevented the game from being good. Yep, you just can't have great games on DVD...nevermind having next-gen ones. ... Last I checked, HD or not, DVDs were doing fine on computers for a long time. Does that mean that future games might require the HDD to 'install' to gain the complete benefit of compression? Sure. Small price to pay for having greater success up front and rolling into the future.

No but it prevented Epic from creating the game the way they wanted and that's enough for me. The only game consoles that had such horrible RAM/disc capacity ratio were Dreamcast and X360 and there's a reason for that. The more textures become bigger and worlds become more diverse and complicated each gen the more disc capacity is needed.

And it's not that companies avoid multiple discs just for costs. Nowadays many if not most games are not just about finishing one level and never visiting it again. It's about backtracking, visiting the same level again to find secret items later revealed in the games, or not using levels at all. Sandbox, action-RPGs, J-RPGs, racing, many times even action adventure games can't work with multiple discs. You seem to bwe stuck in the 32-bit era mentality where multiple discs weren't a problem most of the time because games were much more linear or just used too much CG.

 

[kaching]

This is *exactly* what I was expecting to happen with BD early on.

It's the exact same thing I hope happens every generation of console hardware when they upgrade to higher capacity storage media, but it never really happens. They just don't do many compilations of last gen games.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I never said it was "needed", I said it having the added capacity isn't a hinderance to "next-gen gaming". Not ever game needs beyond DVD capacity...but for those developers that wish to go beyond DVD, why limit them?

And those devs can either make a choice on what's important to include in a single disc layout for release or release multiple discs. Not much a hinderance, IMO.

The damn system isn't even 6 months old yet...prices go down...but you can't "upgrade" capacity. How hard is it to look at short-term expense vs. long-term benefit.

The problem is that the cost to the system is a huge barrier to entry for gaining userbase. And that affects the profitability of the publishers on that platform because the userbase is so small compared to its competition...who is dropping in price also, keeping the gap constant. Who's to say that people will wait that long before choosing to pick up an X360 or Wii? Because, right now, lots of people aren't waiting for PS3 to come down in price and when it does, those other systems will always be less expensive and more accessible with more games available for them thanks to early success. Long term benefit works out fine if there are enough people to care about it then. In a few years' time, will PS3 mean as much to as many people because Wii and X360 have snowballed, as console success usually does, beyond what PS3 could ever have thanks to people choosing their platform of choice? Sony can't wait too long or they risk being marginalized for the rest of the gen. This happened to plenty of technically superior consoles before and it is happening now. The original XBOX was better in basically every way to the PS2, but PS2 was already rolling way faster than MS could hope to catch up. This is what I believe is happening to PS3.

Didn't Microsoft want to release the 360 with 256MB of RAM at first until develops kept asking for more RAM? I'm sure the benefit to having 512MB or RAM sure outweights the short term cost-cutting "benefits" that having 256MB of RAM would have shown. "Bu bu bu bu you can have next gen games with 256MB"...but I sure bet 512 doesn't hurt, does it?

What are we talking about here? RAM or Blu Ray? X360 has 512MB of RAM, and so does the PS3. This isn't the argument here.

 

[Lagaff]

How different are those questions when the answer to the 1st is He would take out the Blu Ray drive?

he maybe trying to say thats what makes the console a lot harder to sell as the price was increased because of it.
That doesnt mean the bluray is not needed in long run.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

No but it prevented Epic from creating the game the way they wanted and that's enough for me. The only game consoles that had such horrible RAM/disc capacity ratio were Dreamcast and X360 and there's a reason for that. The more textures become bigger and worlds become more diverse and complicated each gen the more disc capacity is needed.

Wow. Guess what? Consoles are inherently limited. There are going to be compromises made and nothing stops that from happening. You are greatly overestimating the issue of disc size.

And it's not that companies avoid multiple discs just for costs. Nowadays many if not most games are not just about finishing one level and never visiting it again. It's about backtracking, visiting the same level again to find secret items later revealed in the games, or not using levels at all. Sandbox, action-RPGs, J-RPGs, racing, many times even action adventure games can't work with multiple discs. You seem to still have the 32-bit era mentality where multiple discs weren't a problem most of the time because games were much more linear back then or just used too much CG.

A couple of DVDs isn't that big of a deal for cost. It just isn't. Creating next-gen sandbox experiences aren't necessarily limited to a single disc size. RAM is always going to be the greatest enemy. Let's wait and see how things develop, okay? Because, if I'm right, there won't be many publishers releasing as much on the PS3 in a year's time as there are on the X360 and Wii. Whatever potential there is never meant anything because there simply aren't enough people to give a shit about it on the platform.

 

[OmniGamer]

What are we talking about here? RAM or Blu Ray? X360 has 512MB of RAM, and so does the PS3. This isn't the argument here.

X360 has 512MB or RAM NOW, as a concession to developer demand, but at the start they were thinking about having 256MB...I was making a connection(price/memory capacity) between going with 256(DVD) vs. 512(Blu-Ray)...remember X360 was all about cutting costs and trying to be profitable after the original XBOX. Thankfully MS saw the LONG TERM BENEFIT TO DEVELOPERS AND CONSUMERS to having more RAM from the outset DESPITE THE SHORT TERM ADDED EXPENSE.

At any rate, i'm not defending the $599 price...yes it's pricey and yes that is a hinderance to userbase growth. However, price goes down. I'd much rather a system be as "future proof" as reasonable possible...see all of the "add-on" stuff going on right now with MS...add-on HD-DVD drive which offers no gaming benefit, 3rd SKU "Elite" edition with gimped HDMI port, etc.

 

[fortified_concept]

Wow. Guess what? Consoles are inherently limited. There are going to be compromises made and nothing stops that from happening. You are greatly overestimating the issue of disc size.

Yes but none of the other limitations as you call them were mentioned by Epic, just disc capacity. Not to mention Epic seems perfectly fine with the current amount of RAM. Limitation in a console is usually called something that stands out and really annoys developers.

A couple of DVDs isn't that big of a deal for cost. It just isn't. Creating next-gen sandbox experiences aren't necessarily limited to a single disc size. RAM is always going to be the greatest enemy.

Like I said cost is the least of the problems with multiple DVDs. I simply don't think many current-gen genres can work with multiple DVDs without becoming freaking annoying. Sure you can change DVDs everytime you exit an area but do you really want to do that?

The rest of the post is just wishful thinking so I'll avoid responding to it.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

X360 has 512MB or RAM NOW, as a concession to developer demand, but at the start they were thinking about having 256MB...I was making a connection(price/memory capacity) between going with 256(DVD) vs. 512(Blu-Ray)...remember X360 was all about cutting costs and trying to be profitable after the original XBOX. Thankfully MS saw the LONG TERM BENEFIT TO DEVELOPERS AND CONSUMERS to having more RAM from the outset DESPITE THE SHORT TERM ADDED EXPENSE.

Great. RAM and disc size are completely different things sharing little in the way of same impact on games. One can't be added easily without forcing people to adopt an (limited) add-on and the other can be remedied by adding a second disc. Not sure why you're equating single disc size to RAM. Is it better to have larger capacity media size? Sure. What I'm saying is that the short term negative impact of much higher price to the system completely ****s any long-term benefit to having that fatter disc. Most people just aren't going to wait that long. It's just not the smart compromise to start off so much higher in price than everyone else.

At any rate, i'm not defending the $599 price...yes it's pricey and yes that is a hinderance to userbase growth. However, price goes down. I'd much rather a system be as "future proof" as reasonable possible...see all of the "add-on" stuff going on right now with MS...add-on HD-DVD drive which offers no gaming benefit, 3rd SKU "Elite" edition with gimped HDMI port, etc.

Great. Love that stupid future proofing shit. How about providing better software now so I can actually benefit from the console. **** that feature of 'potential' importance. My money is wanting to be served well now, as a consumer. The only potential I care about is that the platform looks good for the future of software releases from a lot of different publishers and developers. That has only historically happened with early enough success and viability due to good pricing of hardware and good range of software in the early going.

 

[Draft]

The thing about future proofing is that present success defines future trends, and currently the most popular consoles are using good old DVD-9. Blu Ray, at the moment, is all dressed up with nowhere to go.

If sales trends continue, and DVD-9 based systems continue to dominate the PS3, development houses looking to make multi-console titles, or those who want multiple teams creating exclusive content for each platform, are going to base their internal technology on the DVD-9.

The benefits of more storage space on an optical medium is apparent to anyone who cares to think about it. The importance of more storage space are still up in the air. Especially so since practically speaking, the industry is largely ignoring Blu Ray in favor of DVD-9. Right now there are more 3rd party devs making Wii games, or games for the Xbox 360 and PS3, and those dual platform titles will obviously have to be crammed onto DVD-9s.

Any argument which is based upon the potential of Blu Ray or any other large capacity optical disc can get tossed right out the window. We're past potential. We're in the now. DVD-9 is delivering, Blu Ray is not.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Yes but none of the other limitations as you call them were mentioned by Epic, just disc capacity. Not to mention Epic seems perfectly fine with the current amount of RAM. Limitation in a console is usually called something that stands out and really annoys developers.

Great. Limitations are always going to be bitched about. That's what happens with every single platform ever. Their job is to work around those limitations with software. That's just how it is and will likely always be. Still doesn't change the fact that great games come out all the time on limited hardware.

Like I said cost is the least of the problems with multiple DVDs. I simply don't think many current-gen genres can work with multiple DVDs without becoming freaking annoying. Sure you can change DVDs everytime you exit an area but do you really want to do that?

Does someone really have to come in here to list off just how small current and last gen sandbox games are on disc? You are greatly overestimating the limits of DVD.

The rest of the post is just wishful thinking so I'll avoid responding to it.

Right. As usual, your posts aren't really worth responding to, but I always do. *shrug*

 

[KTallguy]

How about providing better software now so I can actually benefit from the console. **** that feature of 'potential' importance. My money is wanting to be served well now, as a consumer. The only potential I care about is that the platform looks good for the future of software releases from a lot of different publishers and developers. That has only historically happened with early enough success and viability due to good pricing of hardware and good range of software in the early going.

That's absolutely true. There's great, quality software on the PS3 now (Motorstorm, VF5, Resistance, GT:HD), and tons more to come very soon.

And, there's blockbusters like MGS4 and Final Fantasy waiting in the wings.

Yes, PS3 is having a slow start, but games are coming.

Too many people are suckin' down that bullshit about Blu Ray being necessary for the games of two or more years down the line without even thinking about what they're agreeing with. Someone can come in and say, how are you going to get those next-gen graphics onto a DVD in a year or so? Right...let's wait a year or so and see how PS3 is at the bottom of the hill while the masses are 'suffering' with shitty ol' DVDs on their PC, Wii, and X360, shall we?

It's less about "next gen" graphics, which are obviously possible on the 360. It's more about having more space to include more content of better quality, higher quality sound, more areas, environments. Not all game designs are linear and lend themselves to switching discs. More space is not a bad thing for developers, and crushing barriers is very important if we want to see ground breaking materials.

 

[fortified_concept]

Great. Limitations are always going to be bitched about. That's what happens with every single platform ever. Their job is to work around those limitations with software. That's just how it is and will likely always be. Still doesn't change the fact that great games come out all the time on limited hardware.

Difference is, if the last two generations were any indication, disc capacity seems to be by far the worst limitation in consoles. See Dreamcast and N64.

 

[gkryhewy]

That's absolutely true. There's great, quality software on the PS3 now (Motorstorm, VF5, Resistance, GT:HD), and tons more to come very soon.

And, there's blockbusters like MGS4 and Final Fantasy waiting in the wings.

Yes, PS3 is having a slow start, but games are coming.

....Phil?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

That's absolutely true. There's great, quality software on the PS3 now (Motorstorm, VF5, Resistance, GT:HD), and tons more to come very soon.

And, there's blockbusters like MGS4 and Final Fantasy waiting in the wings.

Yes, PS3 is having a slow start, but games are coming.

Well, there are a few great games on the platform. I agree with that. There were some great games on the 3D0, too. Look how well that turned out. Sony needs to bite the bullet and drop the price if they wish to hold a sizeable percentage of the market. As long as their sales are slow, the less chance they have to hold onto great software coming from those outside of the first party stable.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Difference is, if the last two generations were any indication, disc capacity seems to be by far the worst limitation in consoles. See Dreamcast and N64.

Obviously, you're smoking crack. By far, the worst limitation in those consoles was developer support.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

That's absolutely true. There's great, quality software on the PS3 now (Motorstorm, VF5, Resistance, GT:HD), and tons more to come very soon.

And, there's blockbusters like MGS4 and Final Fantasy waiting in the wings.

Yes, PS3 is having a slow start, but games are coming.



It's less about "next gen" graphics, which are obviously possible on the 360. It's more about having more space to include more content of better quality, higher quality sound, more areas, environments. Not all game designs are linear and lend themselves to switching discs. More space is not a bad thing for developers, and crushing barriers is very important if we want to see ground breaking materials.

That's great. I agree that more media size is a benefit...never argued against it. The cost of having that extra disc space is preventing the system from taking hold. It's a bad compromise and one that adversely affects the system's success.

 

[KTallguy]

Well, there are a few great games on the platform. I agree with that. There were some great games on the 3D0, too. Look how well that turned out. Sony needs to bite the bullet and drop the price if they wish to hold a sizeable percentage of the market. As long as their sales are slow, the less chance they have to hold onto great software coming from those outside of the first party stable.

Absolutely true, if Sony doesn't drop the price by this fall they'll be in a WORLD of hurt.

....Phil?

Yes? Do you like my shiny, bald head and my sophisticated

Spoiler

pretentious

accent?

 

[fortified_concept]

Well, there are a few great games on the platform. I agree with that. There were some great games on the 3D0, too. Look how well that turned out. Sony needs to bite the bullet and drop the price if they wish to hold a sizeable percentage of the market. As long as their sales are slow, the less chance they have to hold onto great software coming from those outside of the first party stable.

Oh god... You make it sound like the other consoles have these great 3rd party exclusives that PS3 misses on. Please enlighten us, show us the AAA 3rd party exclusives on X360 and Wii that are better than FFXIII&Versus and MGS4.

Obviously, you're smoking crack. By far, the worst limitation in those consoles was developer support.

:rollseyes We're talking about hardware and you know it. Don't try to change the subject.

 

[Draft]

Oh god... You make it sound like the other consoles have these great 3rd party exclusives that PS3 misses on. Please enlighten us, show us the AAA 3rd party exclusives that compete FFXIII&Versus and MGS4.



:rollseyes We're talking about hardware and you know it. Don't try to change the subject.

LIST WAR! LIST WAR! LISTEN UP EVERYBODY LIST WAR! IT'S ON! IT'S SO ****ING ON!

LIST WAR!

 

[KTallguy]

Oh god... You make it sound like the other consoles have these great 3rd party exclusives that PS3 misses on. Please enlighten us, show us the AAA 3rd party exclusives that compete FFXIII&Versus and MGS4.

Mass Effect, Halo 3, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddessy.

These are not shitty games. Many people will bite. Halo 3 will be huge.

 

[fortified_concept]

Mass Effect, Halo 3, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddessy.

These are not shitty games. Many people will bite. Halo 3 will be huge.

I assumed he's talking about 3rd party exclusives because he said "a few games". 1st party-wise Sony is doing such a great job nowadays that I'd just laugh at his comment.

 

[kaching]

Because, if I'm right, there won't be many publishers releasing as much on the PS3 in a year's time as there are on the X360 and Wii. Whatever potential there is never meant anything because there simply aren't enough people to give a shit about it on the platform.

There's probably the better part of a million gamers who are happy that Insomniac was able to flesh out Resistance more than they would have been able to if they had to target DVD. I very much doubt they would have aimed for a multi-disc release.

It doesn't take a high volume of support to make the inclusion worthwhile, just a handful of high-quality game experiences that take advantage of it. When you look at the maximum capabilities of any console, it's really no different. Vast majority of games on any platform won't take full advantage of what it offers, so one could play this tune on each, asking why the manufacturer bothered to spec it "as high" as they did in the first place.

 

[OmniGamer]

Great. Love that stupid future proofing shit. How about providing better software now so I can actually benefit from the console. **** that feature of 'potential' importance. My money is wanting to be served well now, as a consumer.

Wanting, or hell, expecting/demanding a certain level of future-proofing when dropping a $400-$600 investment on a system, isn't "shit". When I buy a system, I want it to serve me well now, AS WELL AS all through its supported life-cycle.

 

[JCBossman]

WOW FC, you are the most raving Sony Fanboy on GAF...Congrats.
Blue-Ray WOULD HAVE been nice if it didn't add much cost, but it does, and THAT is the problem, you can only really afford 1 expensive tech in a console.If the PS3 60gb was exactly the same as it is but without the Blu-Ray anyone doubt it would be sub $500 at launch?

 

[Ploid 3.0]

About the dvd being the lowest common denominator (epic about unreal or is it ID, just browsed the interview, lost the page *30gigs on one pc, tetra all together, gotta make it smaller, etc). As long as sony has it's first/second party games, and a few 3rd parties do stuff with the space here and there I'll enjoy that. I'll also enjoy download games, and dvd size games if it interest me. If in time I get comfortable with the larger sized games, I'll just be more cautious on which 3rd party game I buy and wait for reviews, and gaf. I don't buy many games (30+ games), and a lot of the sony games are fun (based on ps2). I'll be fine with worst case scenario for ps3 (still have ps2 games to finish and buy, sony games, team ico with a good machine to play with, etc.).

 

[SolidSnakex]

WOW FC, you are the most raving Sony Fanboy on GAF...Congrats.
Blue-Ray WOULD HAVE been nice if it didn't add much cost, but it does, and THAT is the problem, you can only really afford 1 expensive tech in a console.If the PS3 60gb was exactly the same as it is but without the Blu-Ray anyone doubt it would be sub $500 at launch?

You've got alot of nerve calling anyone a fanboy.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

WOW FC, you are the most raving Sony Fanboy on GAF...Congrats.
Blue-Ray WOULD HAVE been nice if it didn't add much cost, but it does, and THAT is the problem, you can only really afford 1 expensive tech in a console.If the PS3 60gb was exactly the same as it is but without the Blu-Ray anyone doubt it would be sub $500 at launch?

It would of still been been $500, cell,hdmi,wireless net,bluetooth,sd slots etc.

 

[JCBossman]

You've got alot of nerve calling anyone a fanboy.

I think you mean BALLS, as in BIG BRASS ONES...Yes I do

 

[fortified_concept]

WOW FC, you are the most raving Sony Fanboy on GAF...

I don't know if I'm a fanboy because I'm just expessing my opinion, what I know for sure though is that at least I'm not a troll like you. I gladly accept criticism from normal people but not from your kind. Now go back to the heavenly sword thread to tell us how much it "looks like an Xbox 1 game".

Blue-Ray WOULD HAVE been nice if it didn't add much cost, but it does, and THAT is the problem, you can only really afford 1 expensive tech in a console.If the PS3 60gb was exactly the same as it is but without the Blu-Ray anyone doubt it would be sub $500 at launch?

sub 500$? You do realize that Bluray on PS3 costs 125$, right? You also realize that costs drop but the hardware remains the same, right? Personally I prefer a future-proof expensive console that will eventually become cheaper, than a cheaper one with limitations in hardware than can't be fixed.

 

[Kittonwy]

WOW FC, you are the most raving Sony Fanboy on GAF...Congrats.
Blue-Ray WOULD HAVE been nice if it didn't add much cost, but it does, and THAT is the problem, you can only really afford 1 expensive tech in a console.If the PS3 60gb was exactly the same as it is but without the Blu-Ray anyone doubt it would be sub $500 at launch?

20/20 hindsight is wonderful, but what's done is done, Blu-Ray is in every PS3, the price is set, maybe it's a good idea to find a way to improve Sony's current situation, like making more system-selling software, something that I would love to see David Jaffe do.

 

[Jive Turkey]

Wait...Just skimmed the thread but did Jaffe go from "God of Sony" to "lol Jaffe is an idiot he only makes crappy minigames for PS3 lol" among the Sony hardcore?

You've got alot of nerve calling anyone a fanboy.

Woah! Hey there! When did you get back?

 

[szaromir]

sub 500$? You do realize that Bluray on PS3 costs 125$, right?

Your insider knowledge is amazing me