The PS3 Is Here.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

Correction:

Valve founder, Gabe Newell, made millions working for Microsoft, which soured any attempt at a relationship that he could have had with Sony. He pretty much flat out refuses to work for any platform besides the Xbox or the PC, which is kind of short sighted. The Orange Box port to the PS3 was wholly a waste of time due to improper coding (EA had to outsource the development of the port because Valve wouldn't touch it). Despite the fact that developing for multiple consoles would in no way hurt the man, he seems to be under the impression that Sony is disloyal to their fanbase, and that the PS3 is impossible to code for (which, apparently, it isn't, but what do I know, I'm a bear - I suck the heads off fish).

Song lory short, no L4D on PS3.

**** my life.

Where did you hear this? Also, what's wrong with the PS3 Orange Box? I want to get it

[ShAiOnEi]

Yeah man well if you went on kotaku or another credible gaming source site you would know that valve wants to **** on ps3. Believe it or not but the ps3 is considerably harder to code/port a game to sony's console so developers are either dropping the ball making ****ty ports or not making ports at all. But real game developers can overcome this problem as we have seen. Either way it's not that big of a deal because I don't salivate over valves games anyways.

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

Goooooooooooooooooooodd ooffff Waaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!

You get the point

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by ShAiOnEi

But real game developers can overcome this problem

Goooooooooooooooooooodd ooffff Waaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!

[nforcer06164]

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

Which Ratchet and Clank sucked ass? I'm not questioning you're information (unless it's wrong), I just actually don't get which one you're talking about. The second one hasn't come out yet. What do you mean by, "Killer app? No"?

Go on gamerankings and do a search for Ratchet. I assume it's the expansion Mal mentioned.

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

The Uncharted series (Jak) is coming, your bad.

Naughty Dog temporarily dropped production of Jak & Daxter to work on the Uncharted series. They are nowhere near the same game, just made by the same developer. That's like saying Bonk's Adventure for the TurboGrafx-16 is the same series as Trauma Center: Under The Knife for the Nintendo DS because they were both developed by Atlus. HURF.

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

"I wonder why" isn't a question, and aside from that, what do you mean? I honestly didn't catch the hidden sarcastic message when you said, "I wonder why".

The sarcasm basically meant that since the PS3 has such a small user base as compared to the 360, it makes sense to have a game like Final Fantasy XIII go multi-platform.

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

Every hardcore Xbox fan I've ever met hates the PS3 for reasons that are based on either opinion or facts that they made up, and they love to be complete dicks. "This game is better than that game, and if you don't think so, you're a p**sy", "The Xbox has better graphics", "XBOX 360 KICKS THE PS3'S ASS, WOOOO!! **** PS3 F**GOTS ,,l,,"

Anecdotal evidence, and you've proven that you're no better.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by nforcer06164

Go on gamerankings and do a search for Ratchet. I assume it's the expansion Mal mentioned.

Naughty Dog temporarily dropped production of Jak & Daxter to work on the Uncharted series.[...] HURF.

The sarcasm basically meant that since the PS3 has such a small user base as compared to the 360, it makes sense to have a game like Final Fantasy XIII go multi-platform.

Anecdotal evidence, and you've proven that you're no better.

Why even mention an expansion pack as an example of a bad game, especially an expansion to a well-rated game?

I thought the new Jak series was going to be called "Jak: Uncharted" or something LMAO I'd be searching this stuff if I didn't think my computer would freeze for another hour :/

^^^Did you see that? I just stated that I was wrong, again. You on the other hand are avoiding the parts of this debate where I prove you wrong, but paying close attention to where I screw up. Oh yeah, and "HURF". That proves that I'm no better indeed lmao
What am I doing that makes me worse than an Xboxer? Make sure you aren't doing it too.

The PS3 has a small user base because first it was too expensive, and now that it's near the same price, it isn't worth it anymore, because Xbox developed the bigger community. Coming back from that tangent, that WOULD make sense to go multi-platform, but that doesn't apply to "The new Jak game is going to PS2 ONLY". The "I wonder why"'s didn't have the same meaning?

Aside from our little debate, have you read all the other comments about this topic? This argument we're having doesn't even have a purpose. I'm arguing the PS3 over 360, but you don't care about either. You can go ahead and respond to this, but I might not pay much attention to it.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by ShAiOnEi

There is a credible rumor coming up that the playstation network will soon be releasing ps2 games as downloadable content. Either way I own a ps2 and ps3 so it doesn't matter to me. Like you said your not interested in 360 exclusives same here I know the ps3 in general is a better console than the skeleton called the 360. When I pay full price for my ps3 I know I'm getting a better deal. There is nothing wrong with the network it runs fine especially when I've played games like mag that introduce 256 players.

Yeah, because what I really want to do is rebuy all of the terrible games I already own on PS2 just so I can play them on a modern system. Screw that, bro. It's not like I would want to pop in my copy of We <3 Katamari and go to town... no, I want to have to rebuy what I already own.

Originally Posted by nforcer06164

Such as?

Afrobean, I'm talking exclusives. Rock Band is on all three systems, so that doesn't count.

I mentioned exclusives briefly. There's things like MGS, Gran Tourismo, Final Fantasy (maybe? I'm not so sure anymore), and my Katamari remake.

But none of them are enough for me to buy a PS3. But by the same token, neither are the 360 "exclusives". I only have a 360 because of the two, 360 is cheaper and more common among people I would want to play online with (not that I ever got around to setting up online).

Originally Posted by Flaming_Dingleberry

Does the PC have a good controller yet? I might get into that once I get a good computer and an acceptable controller, that's my main problem. I can't play those perfect PC games you're talking about since I'd have to turn the graphics down as far as possible to even run it, and even then it'll lag and lag and freeze from time to time to time to time.....

uh

How about a 360 controller? How about a Playstation controller? How about a NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, etc.?

HOW ABOUT ANY CONTROLLER EVER PLUS TOTALLY NEW ONES MADE ESPECIALLY FOR PC? And there's what Squeek said: mouse is definitely tops for FPS, although I would say I'm not so fond of keyboard.

Also: it's cheaper to take an average computer and make it have awesome graphics and gaming hardware than to buy a 300 dollar PS3. So yeah, you're dumb.

ps at troll above talking about 90% failure rate for 360s: my 360 is in good shape and never had any problems. Maybe it's because I'm not an idiot, I take good care of my stuff and I don't block ventilation. Also: PS3 gets BS DLC too. I know Arkham Asylum just came out and for some reason, playing as the Joker is limited to the PS3 version of the game.

[MrRubix]

Why the **** do people have to take sides.

Is it wrong to like all of them? Eesh.

I loved the NES, Sega Genesis, SNES, N64, Dreamcast, PSX, PS2, Gamecube, XBox, XBox 360, PS3, etc. I don't like the Wii so much due to the types of games available, but alas.

There are fun games to be had all around.

[MrRubix]

In other news though, when the console wars began, I nabbed a Wii and XBox 360. I don't own a PS3, but this was primarily due to price. The thing is, I find that many of the games for the 360 I can just beast out on my PC, and my Wii rarely gets touched anymore. The novelty of the Wii kinda wears off, and basically suffers from Smash syndrome in the same way that the Gamecube did (at least for me).

I think the PS3 is a decent purchase, but it was way too expensive when it first came out. However, I think the game selection is decent and it's got a lot going for it. I don't regret buying my 360, but had I known I could have just played all those 360 games by using the PC versions, I *might* have instead just foregone the 360 (and definitely the Wii) and sunk that funding into the PS3.

[Squeek]

Originally Posted by ShAiOnEi

Yeah man well if you went on kotaku or another credible gaming source site you would know that valve wants to **** on ps3. Believe it or not but the ps3 is considerably harder to code/port a game to sony's console so developers are either dropping the ball making ****ty ports or not making ports at all. But real game developers can overcome this problem as we have seen. Either way it's not that big of a deal because I don't salivate over valves games anyways.

Valve's games are almost all in the 90%+ range. They're praised as one of the greatest game development companies EVER.

I wouldn't call them a "fake" game developer.

Maybe YOU don't like them, but again, that's ANECDOTAL. In the gaming community, Valve is up there with Blizzard. Valve = Quality.

This isn't even about PS3 at this point. You just clearly hate EVERYTHING.

[ShAiOnEi]

Originally Posted by Squeek

Valve's games are almost all in the 90%+ range. They're praised as one of the greatest game development companies EVER.

I wouldn't call them a "fake" game developer.

Maybe YOU don't like them, but again, that's ANECDOTAL. In the gaming community, Valve is up there with Blizzard. Valve = Quality.

This isn't even about PS3 at this point. You just clearly hate EVERYTHING.

You keep using that word anecdotal I never called them a fake game developer I never disregarded it as a good game. I just simply stated that the developers apparently want nothing to do with the ps3 just because they feel it's too much trouble. That in my opinion is pretty pussy for a developer that can churn out good games but only solely for one console. I personally dislike games made from valve and that's my opinion I don't hate everything I don't even know why you even say that.

[Squeek]

Originally Posted by ShAiOnEi

You keep using that word anecdotal

Because you keep posting things that aren't statistically accurate.

I never called them a fake game developer I never disregarded it as a good game.

Originally Posted by You, in the previous post

But real game developers can overcome this problem as we have seen.

Emphasis added.

Valve tried to put the Orange Box on the PS3. It was terrible. The game was developed on their home platform: the PC. It was easily ported to the 360 but had numerous problems on the PS3. With all the complications they had, they just abandoned it for future titles.

If you develop a console game for consoles and you want it multiplatform, these days you will need a separate development team to handle the work on the PS3. This is the reason most companies either develop exclusively on the PS3 or choose to do both, releasing the PS3 version a year or so later.

I just simply stated that the developers apparently want nothing to do with the ps3 just because they feel it's too much trouble. That in my opinion is pretty pussy for a developer that can churn out good games but only solely for one console. I personally dislike games made from valve and that's my opinion I don't hate everything I don't even know why you even say that.

Sorry that the developers can't cater to your every whim. If you want someone to blame, blame Sony for deciding to use ass-backwards architecture in their developer's boxes.

Either pony up the cash for all three consoles or make your choice and stick to it. There's no point in complaining about other companies for not developing things for the console you chose. Blame the console you chose.

Nintendo decided to front-load its console with all the good games it was going to release. Now the Wii hasn't seen a good game in years. I blame Nintendo for the lack of games and myself for buying it (though I did end up with a 20 game library before I put the thing in my closet). I ended up buying a 360 for the games I wanted that weren't on PC or Wii. I don't regret it at all.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

uh

How about a 360 controller? How about a Playstation controller? How about a NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, etc.?

HOW ABOUT ANY CONTROLLER EVER PLUS TOTALLY NEW ONES MADE ESPECIALLY FOR PC? And there's what Squeek said: mouse is definitely tops for FPS, although I would say I'm not so fond of keyboard.

Also: it's cheaper to take an average computer and make it have awesome graphics and gaming hardware than to buy a 300 dollar PS3. So yeah, you're dumb.

What the **** is this? First of all, Squeek answered everything already, and as a bonus to me, had a helpful attitude (wow!). I never thought, nor gave any impression whatsoever that consoles were better than PC. I actually didn't know... so I asked... do you understand? I hadn't looked into it, and thought that maybe I should get someone's opinion based on experience, and I get that, and now you drop in and call me dumb because I buy consoles. What was the point?

Here's the thing, I have better luck with TV's than computers because:
1) I don't have my own computer at the moment, but a TV is something I do have.
2) My TV doesn't crash, the family computer does.
3) I'm willing to pay a little more money to easily suit my situation.

The situation I'm in right now makes it difficult for me to use a computer, that makes me "dumb"? Also, spending less money on something doesn't make it the better option.

[MalReynolds]

Correction: Valve did not try to put The Orange Box on the PS3. EA did. And EA screwed it up.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

Correction: Valve did not try to put The Orange Box on the PS3. EA did. And EA screwed it up.

How is it screwed up? I need to know whether I should get it or not.

[MalReynolds]

I posted it on the page before. Primarily, it's glitchy, load times are terrible, game crashes abound, the online community is dead.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

I'm only getting it for Portals, is it going to be worth it?

[OnixRose]

So...if your ps3 starts up, loads the default background but not the menu...what does this mean?

[fido123]

Originally Posted by ShAiOnEi

You keep using that word anecdotal I never called them a fake game developer I never disregarded it as a good game. I just simply stated that the developers apparently want nothing to do with the ps3 just because they feel it's too much trouble. That in my opinion is pretty pussy for a developer that can churn out good games but only solely for one console. I personally dislike games made from valve and that's my opinion I don't hate everything I don't even know why you even say that.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~smit/asm01001.htm

This is the kind of **** they have to do, to make a game work on different architectures. Understand how difficult it is, and understand Valve has a MUCH smaller staff to my knowledge. It just simply wouldn't be worth it. Valve makes games that appeal to PC gamers, and they're staying that way, and it's not a bad plan for them at all. Blizzard does the same thing, and they're probably the most successful game company out there.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Originally Posted by fido123

http://www.xs4all.nl/~smit/asm01001.htm

This is the kind of **** they have to do, to make a game work on different architectures. Understand how difficult it is, and understand Valve has a MUCH smaller staff to my knowledge. It just simply wouldn't be worth it. Valve makes games that appeal to PC gamers, and they're staying that way, and it's not a bad plan for them at all. Blizzard does the same thing, and they're probably the most successful game company out there.

I'm sure the process is difficult, and they don't have a lot of staff... but are they not doing it because of the work involved, or because Gabe Newell doesn't like Sony?

[Squeek]

I would imagine it's a combination of the two, but primarily the former.

Half-Life was on the PS2. I doubt they had any problems porting it.

The PS2 was such a huge success mainly because of the simplicity of the devbox. It was ridiculously easy to program for and had comparable graphics to its competitors. As a result, thousands of games came out for it and several of them were huge hits that produced millions of copies sold.

It's the exact opposite for the PS3. Sony attributed the core success of the PS2 to the fact that it had DVD functionality, which was huge at the time. So they overloaded the PS3 with hardware and BR functionality. However, the development community hadn't seen any of the hardware before. It was entirely foreign. It was a huge turn-off to developers who would prefer to spend less time and money just developing on the PC-like box that Microsoft provided for the 360. Not to mention that the break-even point for sales is much higher on the PS3 than it is on the 360 or Wii--you have to sell two to three times as many copies of your game on the PS3 just to break even (it's about 500,000 to 300,000 to 150,000, respectively).

In unrelated news, the Wii is getting a $50 price cut, so watch out :X