Support NeoGAF

[LosDaddie]

And you are wrong junior. It's not as clear cut as that. Go find out how they work and you will learn something.

Clear cut as what?:lol I already know how they work.

 

[permutated]

You see, one could also argue that DVD is not needed cause you can just have multiple CDs. The bottom line is to stay ahead of the curve, not behind it.

Well put.

 

[dojokun]

Claiming Victory just seemed like the natural extension of your previous post:



To me, that statement basically translates into: "LULZ....DOOM4 PROVES BLU-RAY > DVD9....JUST LIKE WE'VE BEEN TELLING THE XBOTS ALL ALONG"

No one's disputed whether or not Blu-Ray is better than DVD9, just whether it was needed this generation.

It's odd that a group of people can put forth a supposition (that Blu-Ray was not needed this generation), and anyone who disagrees is "claiming victory." Are we not allowed to disagree with that first group? We HAVE to agree that Blu-Ray is useless this generation? I don't see you mocking the first group, summarizing their words by quoting it as "LULZ.... MULTIPLAT GAMES BETTER ON 360 PROVES 360 > PS3, JUST LIKE WE'VE BEEN TELLING THE PLAYSLAVES ALL ALONG"

That's excatly what this is about. A "gotcha" on 360. We'll have ours with the graphical comparison thread and the NPD thread though, we just have to wait a bit longer.

No, this is about the supposition that Blu-Ray was not needed this generation. If you're heavily biased towards one side, then maybe it's about that for you. A simple statement is made that Blu-Ray pays off this generation, and you equate that with a "gotcha" on the 360. I think an intelligent, non-biased poster would simply take the statement to mean exactly what it means: that Blu-Ray paid off this generation. That doesn't mean the PS3 is a better console to own.

 

[garks]

Yeah. Same thing Microsoft does in numerous other occasions, so why not?

I was just asking for clarification since you wrote it in such a vague way.

 

[LosDaddie]

It's odd that a group of people can put forth a supposition (that Blu-Ray was not needed this generation), and anyone who disagrees is "claiming victory." Are we not allowed to disagree with that first group? We HAVE to agree that Blu-Ray is useless this generation? I don't see you mocking the first group, summarizing their words by quoting it as "LULZ.... MULTIPLAT GAMES BETTER ON 360 PROVES 360 > PS3, JUST LIKE WE'VE BEEN TELLING THE PLAYSLAVES ALL ALONG"

Nice strawman you built there so you could easily knock down. :lol

You weren't just disagreeing. You were using Doom4 as vindication that blu-ray is "needed" this gen. Sure, you proved blu-ray is needed.....if you don't feel like swapping discs

 

[dojokun]

Nice strawman you built there so you could easily knock down. :lol

You weren't just disagreeing. You were using Doom4 as vindication that blu-ray is "needed" this gen. Sure, you proved blu-ray is needed.....if you don't feel like swapping discs

The supposition was that Blu-Ray was not needed... so disagreeing means saying that it was needed. How is that not just disagreeing?

And as I pointed out earlier in the thread, "needed" in this context is relative. One could use a ton of CDs if they don't mind swapping discs.

And as for strawman, YOU'RE the one who re-interpretted my post to mean something else so you could knock it down. I made a statement about Blu-Ray and you turned it into a knock on 360 owners, of which I am one myself. You knew you couldn't knock down my statement that Blu-Ray showed its merit, so you turned it into an "I told you so" thing.

As you said yourself, the "claiming victory" interpretation you made was an EXTENSION of my post, that you read into. It's not what I said, it's what you yourself made-up as an extension to what I said.

 

[garks]

bu.. bu.. bu.. but blu-ray is pointless right xbox fans? :lol hahahaha Carmack must be a sony fan huh? :lol

it must be a money hat./sarcasm

Or.....Carmack is not an ugly nerd anymore. Year of the PS3!

 

[dojokun]

I was just asking for clarification since you wrote it in such a vague way.

Well it could also mean future business deals go smoother, more hardware engineering support from Sony, etc. But moneyhat is a definite possibility in addition to the above.

 

[LosDaddie]

And as for strawman, YOU'RE the one who re-interpretted my post to mean something else so you knock it down. I made a statement about Blu-Ray and you turned it into a knock on 360 owners, of which I am one myself.

:lol Oh please. You used Doom4 as an example to prove blu-ray is needed and therefore everyone who argued the opposite was wrong.

You didn't come out and claim victory, but it was implied.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

More space is always awesome.

What that higher storage space did to Sony though? Not so awesome.

The PS3 would (potentially) have been better off going with a simple DVD drive. That doesn't knock the usefulness of BR (more storage is always better), but does put a damper on it's use this generation. 80 million consoles have been sold this gen that use DVD drives. 20 million have been sold that use BR.

It wasn't cost effective for Sony to use BR this gen, regardless of it's definite superiority.

 

[dojokun]

:lol Oh please. You used Doom4 as an example to prove blu-ray is needed and therefore everyone who argued the opposite was wrong.

You didn't come out and claim victory, but it was implied.

I am arguing they are wrong on whether or not Blu-Ray was needed, but that's not a "gotcha" on the 360. And how is it claiming victory to think someone else is wrong about something? They think I am wrong, so by your logic they are also claiming victory.

 

[RavenFox]

More space is always awesome.

What that higher storage space did to Sony though? Not so awesome.

The PS3 would (potentially) have been better off going with a simple DVD drive. That doesn't knock the usefulness of BR (more storage is always better), but does put a damper on it's use this generation. 80 million consoles have been sold this gen that use DVD drives. 20 million have been sold that use BR.

It wasn't cost effective for Sony to use BR this gen, regardless of it's definite superiority.

Thank god they didn't listen to you. First party games [YES THE GAMES] says it all. Thank You for the tech is all.
edit: Oh and my multilanguage games and awesome sound thank it to.

 

[LosDaddie]

You knew you couldn't knock down my statement that Blu-Ray showed its merit, so you turned it into an "I told you so" thing.

As you said yourself, the "claiming victory" interpretation you made was an EXTENSION of my post, that you read into. It's not what I said, it's what you yourself made-up as an extension to what I said.

Nice editing.

I never denied blu-ray showed its merit. That's just you building another strawman to knock down....Not my inability to refute your statement.

It's just that the "merit" you're hanging your hat on is not having to swap discs.

 

[dojokun]

Nice editing.

I never denied blu-ray showed its merit. That's just you building another strawman to knock down....Not my inability to refute your statement.

It's just that the "merit" you're hanging your hat on is not having to swap discs.

Are you refuting my statement that Blu-Ray showed its merit? Yes or no. If yes, then it was not a strawman argument. If no, then what are you disagreeing with me about?

And the merit of not swapping discs is the same merit DVD has over CD.

 

[LosDaddie]

They think I am wrong, so by your logic they are also claiming victory.

They are arguing from a different angle than you. Their argument is that if blu-ray was needed, then Doom4 wouldn't be on X360 because it doesn't have a BD drive.

You are arguing from the angle of 1 BD > 3 DVDs, so therefore blu-ray is needed

Spoiler

if you don't want to swap discs

.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Thank god they didn't listen to you. First party games [YES THE GAMES] says it all. Thank You for the tech is all.
edit: Oh and my multilanguage games and awesome sound thank it to.

If they had listened to me the market would be a much much different place. Sony and Nintendo decking it out for first with MS stuck in the GCN area. And it's not like you'd have known any better.

 

[Fakto]

You are scaring the anons !

 

[dojokun]

They are arguing from a different angle than you. Their argument is that if blu-ray was needed, then Doom4 wouldn't be on X360 because it doesn't have a BD drive.

You are arguing from the angle of 1 BD > 3 DVDs, so therefore blu-ray is needed

Spoiler

if you don't want to swap discs

.

That was my point. My point is that "needed" is not a matter of "can it happen" in the context of optical media. You could put Doom 4 on a several CDs and swap them repeatedly, and people would say that you need more storage space per disc because of that. Therefore, they are using the wrong definition of "needed."

By their logic, DVD isn't needed either.

 

["God's Beard!"]

Third, the reason why they lost 3rd party support is because of the complexities of CELL, not because of Blu-Ray.

No, they lost 3rd party support because PS3 costs a fuck-ton of money.

MGS4? Unchar... I'll stop now

Kojima said he could have done MGS4 on 360 if he wanted to, but he didn't.

 

[dojokun]

No, they lost 3rd party support because PS3 costs a fuck-ton of money.

Well I think that's an additional reason to what I said. Both what I said and what you said were factors. But my point was that segarr was claiming that by adding Blu-Ray, Sony lost 3rd party support. I was disputing that by saying it was for other reasons. The extra space of Blu-Ray is something the devs actually like.

 

[LosDaddie]

Are you refuting my statement that Blu-Ray showed its merit? Yes or no. If yes, then it was not a strawman argument. If no, then what are you disagreeing with me about?

:lol I never disagreed with you. Here's what I said:

So you're claiming "victory" with the sole advantage shown so far being less discs?

I just found it a little funny that you felt you "disproved" the blu-not-needed claim with the PS3 version being on one disc instead of 3. Not with the PS3 version having more content, or a better audio trac, or a higher native resolution; But with not having to swap discs.

And the merit of not swapping discs is the same merit DVD has over CD.

Sure. We'll just have to wait & see how this "issue" plays out. Personally, I think the issue of swapping discs is an exaggerated problem.

 

[luka]

I haven't read the whole thread but I'm sure it's just lovely. I'll just say that I hope the PC gets a bluray release as well.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Well I think that's an additional reason to what I said. Both what I said and what you said were factors. But my point was that segarr was claiming that by adding Blu-Ray, Sony lost 3rd party support. I was disputing that by saying it was for other reasons. The extra space of Blu-Ray is something the devs actually like.

It wasn't the inclusion of Blu-Ray that limited developer support. I completely agree with that. It was the fact that the Blu-Ray drives caused the price of the system to rise so much, and with that rise in price came a cry of "Fuck you" from the market at large. It's the disinterest in the system, caused by the price which wouldn't have been as high had Blu-Ray not been added.

In a roundabout way it is Blu-Rays fault, but only insomuch as it caused the system to be too expensive for the market.

 

[LosDaddie]

Therefore, they are using the wrong definition of "needed."

Actually, both sides are using "needed" correctly. Just that both sides are arguing from different perspectives.

 

[Fakto]

No, they lost 3rd party support because PS3 costs a fuck-ton of money.

What games/franchises they lost for that reason ?
I can thing a buch that went multi-plat, but they are still expending money in the PS3 version, so that argument is not valid in multy-platform titles.

 

["God's Beard!"]

Well I think that's an additional reason to what I said. Both what I said and what you said were factors. But my point was that segarr was claiming that by adding Blu-Ray, Sony lost 3rd party support. I was disputing that by saying it was for other reasons. The extra space of Blu-Ray is something the devs actually like.

Certainly its cheaper to license one BD than 2 DVDs, which is something they like.

I don't think the cell actually keeps too many developers from making games as much as it fucks up their games once they've decided to work on the PS3. That's why PS3 always gets the worse multiplatform versions, but I don't think it really loses any.

What games/franchises they lost for that reason ?

Well I can't speak for the majority of studio's internal development decisions, but one obvious answer would be Monster Hunter 3.

 

[dojokun]

:lol I never disagreed with you. Here's what I said:



I just found it a little funny that you felt you "disproved" the blu-not-needed claim with the PS3 version being on one disc instead of 3. Not with the PS3 version having more content, or a better audio trac, or a higher native resolution; But with not having to swap discs.




Sure. We'll just have to wait & see how this "issue" plays out. Personally, I think the issue of swapping discs is an exaggerated problem.

So you felt like picking a fight about how my point was made rather than a disagreement with the actual statement? That's disingenuous and petty. It shows you have a bone to pick with anyone saying anything positive about the PS3 that can't be said about the 360. Combined with your admission that you lean towards 360, it's clear now what the real issue is. It's you not wanting to admit that the PS3 has ANY advantage over the 360. Given that the 360 has its advantages (easier architecture to dev on) over the PS3, I don't think 360 owners should feel so insecure about 1 advantage the PS3 has over the 360.

And how many discs you're willing to swap is personal preference. There's always going to people who don't want to swap any, and there's always going to be people who are willing to swap as many as they have to. If you want to get into "it's not a big deal" then you're arguing subjectivity.

 

[Philanthropist]

Kojima said he could have done MGS4 on 360 if he wanted to, but he didn't.

That's funny, because he actually said the contrary after finishing MGS4.

Pressed on MGS4's exclusivity and the possibility of an Xbox 360 port, Kojima reiterated that the PS3 had been chosen because he believed that the series' success had been entwined with PlayStation's, and admitted that "because MGS4 was optimised for the PS3 it is probably not possible".

 

[LosDaddie]

What games/franchises they lost for that reason ?
I can thing a buch that went multi-plat, but they are still expending money in the PS3 version, so that argument is not valid in multy-platform titles.

While you are definitely correct; I believe he meant PS3 lost exclusive 3rd party developer support.

 

["God's Beard!"]

That's funny, because he actually said the contrary after finishing MGS4.

But he said that he could have made the game for 360 during development. Obviously the final game is optimised for PS3. He chose to make a great PS3 game rather than a multiplatform game.

 

[dojokun]

It wasn't the inclusion of Blu-Ray that limited developer support. I completely agree with that. It was the fact that the Blu-Ray drives caused the price of the system to rise so much, and with that rise in price came a cry of "Fuck you" from the market at large. It's the disinterest in the system, caused by the price which wouldn't have been as high had Blu-Ray not been added.

In a roundabout way it is Blu-Rays fault, but only insomuch as it caused the system to be too expensive for the market.

I suppose you could argue it made the system expensive, as all parts of a system add to the cost.

But I think Sony should have just eaten the costs. If the devs like Blu-Ray, then I think the inclusion of Blu-Ray was good, and the choice by Sony not to eat more of the cost was the real culprit. With console gaming, most money is made from software sales, not hardware sales. Sony should have been willing to take a harder hit at first.

 

[Sibylus]

So, whats that? A 20Gig full install on the 360?

I didn't know shadows took that much space.

Are shadoes cut through butter liek a nife, dood.

 

[dojokun]

Regarding MGS4 being "possible" on 360, I'm sure Kojima just meant it's "not possible" meaning he would have to change so many things that it won't happen. Only extremely biased fans would argue that MGS4 is not possible on 360 because of console specs.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I suppose you could argue it made the system expensive, as all parts of a system add to the cost.

But I think Sony should have just eaten the costs. If the devs like Blu-Ray, then I think the inclusion of Blu-Ray was good, and the choice by Sony not to eat more of the cost was the real culprit. With console gaming, most money is made from software sales, not hardware sales. Sony should have been willing to take a harder hit at first.

They were already taking a hit at $600. It seems that around $400 was about the max of what mass market would sustain. I don't think they were willing to consider a $200+ hit per console. Instead, they banked on consumers embracing it as an all-in-one device for HD gaming and media. They didn't.

 

["God's Beard!"]

Ok guys, look. DVD9 is like a happy little creek, sure there's not much water but he's more than happy to run around really fast through the forest with a couple friends. Blu-Ray is like an iceburg stuck between two big-ass mountains. There's an almost unnecessarily large amount of water, and it's content to crawl its way to its destination over a period of hundreds of years.

 

[LosDaddie]

So you felt like picking a fight about how my point was made rather than a disagreement with the actual statement? That's disingenuous and petty.

Oh lighten up. :lol Again; I just found it a little funny that you felt vindicated with the PS3 version being on one disc. Not with the PS3 version having more content, or a better audio trac, or a higher native resolution; But with not having to swap discs.

It shows you have a bone to pick with anyone saying anything positive about the PS3 that can't be said about the 360. Combined with your admission that you lean towards 360, it's clear now what the real issue is. It's you not wanting to admit that the PS3 has ANY advantage over the 360. Given that the 360 has its advantages (easier architecture to dev on) over the PS3, I don't think 360 owners should feel so insecure about 1 advantage the PS3 has over the 360.

Oh so now I'm insecure? :lol I don't care about which console is superior. I own all 3 consoles. I care about games, which I feel the X360 caters more towards what I like (western games). PS3 is definitely catching up and I've actually bought more PS3 games this year (inFAMOUS, FNR4, SFIV, NCAA10, Uncharted) than any other console.

And I don't have a bone to pick with any PS3 supporter. I just find the "Doom4 proves blu-ray is needed" claim dubious because I don't see that as proving blu-ray is needed.

If you want to get into "it's not a big deal" then you're arguing subjectivity.

In a thread about 1 BD vs 3 DVDs, it's all about subjectivity.

 

[Awntawn]

Ok guys, look. DVD9 is like a happy little creek, sure there's not much water but he's more than happy to run around really fast through the forest with a couple friends. Blu-Ray is like an iceburg stuck between two big-ass mountains. There's an almost unnecessarily large amount of water, and it's content to crawl its way to its destination over a period of hundreds of years.

Oooooh, I finally get it. You're a joke character ;o

 

[Thunder Monkey]

They were already taking a hit at $600. It seems that around $400 was about the max of what mass market would sustain. I don't think they were willing to consider a $200+ hit per console. Instead, they banked on consumers embracing it as an all-in-one device for HD gaming and media. They didn't.

If they launched at $400 wouldn't they have been losing like $400 on each system?

I thought they were losing $200 at $600.

 

[dojokun]

They were already taking a hit at $600. It seems that around $400 was about the max of what mass market would sustain. I don't think they were willing to consider a $200+ hit per console. Instead, they banked on consumers embracing it as an all-in-one device for HD gaming and media. They didn't.

That's true. I also think they used the PS3 to fight the war with HDDVD. If the PS3 was a significant factor in winning the war, I think the inclusion of Blu-Ray paid off in other ways.

 

[Fakto]

While you are definitely correct; I believe he meant PS3 lost exclusive 3rd party developer support.

Errmm, sorry but the, and I quote: "PS3 costs a fuck-ton of money", wasn't the reason.

I always thought that the reason was clearly the head start of the Xbox 360, that lead to a "not big enough" PS3 user base by the time those games where in development,
so maintaining exclusivity of the 3th party, large budged, AAA games wasn't viable anymore, and most went cross platform [and btw, that didn't cut any of the developing cost for the PS3]

 

[Steve Youngblood]

If they launched at $400 wouldn't they have been losing like $400 on each system?

I thought they were losing $200 at $600.

Yeah, I didn't remember the exact number and didn't care to look. Suffice to say, they were already losing money.

 

[dojokun]

Oh lighten up. :lol Again; I just found it a little funny that you felt vindicated with the PS3 version being on one disc. Not with the PS3 version having more content, or a better audio trac, or a higher native resolution; But with not having to swap discs.




Oh so now I'm insecure? :lol I don't care about which console is superior. I own all 3 consoles. I care about games, which I feel the X360 caters more towards what I like (western games). PS3 is definitely catching up and I've actually bought more PS3 games this year (inFAMOUS, FNR4, SFIV, NCAA10, Uncharted) than any other console.

And I don't have a bone to pick with any PS3 supporter. I just find the "Doom4 proves blu-ray is needed" claim dubious because I don't see that as proving blu-ray is needed.





In a thread about 1 BD vs 3 DVDs, it's all about subjectivity.

Yes, you are very insecure and it shows. No one secure in his system of choice would bother picking a fight with me for the reason that you did, and you admitted earlier you lean 360.

And 1 is less than 3. That's not subjective.

 

[KingFire]

Glad I'm a PC gamer.

 

[dojokun]

Yeah, I didn't remember the exact number and didn't care to look. Suffice to say, they were already losing money.

I know they were. That's why I said earlier that Sony should have taken a "harder hit" (as opposed to saying they should have taken a hit). The "harder" word indicates I already knew they were taking a hit.

 

[LosDaddie]

Yes, you are very insecure and it shows. .

:lol Ok, so this has now devolved into: "No I'm not......Yes you are" :lol

I didn't pick a fight with you. I asked you a question

 

["God's Beard!"]

Oooooh, I finally get it. You're a joke character ;o

What the hell?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I know they were. That's why I said earlier that Sony should have taken a "harder hit" (as opposed to saying they should have taken a hit). The "harder" word indicates I already knew they were taking a hit.

Yeah, but it was a hit no one would have expected any company ever to take.

Hell, Sony might have went the way of Sega within a year if they'd have went that way.

 

[dojokun]

:lol Ok, so this has now devolved into: "No I'm not......Yes you are" :lol

I didn't pick a fight with you. I asked you a question

Picking a fight and asking a question are not mutually exclusive. In this context, you clearly picked a fight by asking the question. Any reasonable non-biased person can see that.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

The real question is, will there be enough storage space to contain nuts.wad as it was meant to be played?

 

[LosDaddie]

Picking a fight and asking a question are not mutually exclusive. In this context, you clearly picked a fight by asking the question. Any reasonable non-biased person can see that.

I think a reasonable, non-biased person would not get so bent out of shape by my question.