Sony's P3 delays likely
Linc
OwnerDetroit Icrontian
Sony is waiting on industry consortiums, most notably its Blu-Ray group, to make final decisions on the new DVD technology. The P3 is slated to be a major vehicle for the new medium. A US release could be as late as Thanksgiving.
Source: BBC
Potentially good news for my favorite in the console wars, the Revolution, if Nintendo can capitalize on on the delay by releasing before the P3.“Sony’s design choices for the PS3 [have] resulted in an expensive and difficult-to-manufacture product, and we think that we’re seeing the consequences of those choices play out now,” Merrill Lynch wrote in a recent report. (from related article on FT.com}
Source: BBC
0
Comments
Sony right now has been blowing a lot of smoke with the PS3 and haven't been backing much, if any of it up. About the only thing they've really solidified is Blue Ray and backwards compatible.
Personally for my gaming buck neither the xbox 360 or the PS3 are exciting. I'm looking forward to the Nintendo Revolution and I've never even owned a nintendo before until I picked up a DS. The Revolution, is actually going to potentially revolutionize the way you play the game. Not just beefing up the graphics. I could care less about Burnout 4 if it's the same game (essentially) as burnout 3 just better graphics. That's not an innovation and for me to drop another $350 on a console it's gotta be doing something significantly better/different then what the current gen are doing.
Nintendo is the only comapny so far that is making a new gaming system and not just a prettier one.
Here's hoping that Sony can ramp up production. It's good for us all, no matter which club we're registered fanboys of.
Besides, most of the money will be made back in game sales.
Hi. Please don't spread false information and/or lies. Thanks. :shakehead
With that out of the way, my brother and I will without a doubt be getting a Revolution. We'll be standing in line for as long as it takes. The PS3 is looking more and more promising, assuming it can live up to the hype.
That's the sad part - it's all hype right now. In my opinion, the 360 fell far, far short of its hype. Hopefully the PS3 won't.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees that the Revolution is just that - nintendo said "F* the better graphics on tired old games. We're going to change things"... My kind of system.
That's not saying that kiddie games are bad games because that's not the case. I thoroughly enjoyed Mario 64 in all of it's "E" glory though I acknowledge the likelihood of me seeing a thought-provoking RPG tailored to the older gamer demographic being slim to none. Likewise, the majority of companies developing games rated ESRB "M" won't be developing them on a Nintendo console.
I'm interested to see who all is going to write games for their console. I mean, Microsoft bought Rare so who does that leave besides they themselves? Sega may have the right idea: concentrate on writing good software for your flagship IPs and release on the most popular hardware. Except that they're running said IPs into the ground...
Between the three I'm leaning towards PS3 the most but I'm not touching any hardware until I see at least three killer apps.
-drasnor
-drasnor
That being said just because Nintendo makes family games doesn't mean they aren't releasing 3rd party games that give you the violence and blood people crave, hell GUN, Def Jam, Spawn, True Crime... are out for nintendo. Maybe it's just that GTA isn't on nintendo that people keep this arguement alive...
Perhaps there is an irony that for all the blood, simulated violence and mindless repetetiveness that you need to put into a Mature rated game. It's generally the prepubescent crowd that wants them the most.
Two points. New games and innovation? Here's some for you: Super Mario DS, Super Mario Advance, Advance 2, Advance 3, and Advance 4. Pokemon. Need I go on? The innovation you speak of is in a limited sense, their consoles are well-padded with ports and re-releases. GTA does not a console make. A person on Short-Media bought my old PlayStation2 for the sole purpose of playing Metal Gear games. If you've never played Metal Gear then you wouldn't know that killing someone usually means that you die. Tactical espionage at its finest.
I've never played any of those games besides GTA so I really can't comment. GTA is the whipping boy for a lot of anti-violent gaming movements and rightly so. That out of the way, I've played GTA III and it actually has *gasp* plot and a *omg* reason for the things you do as part of missions. When you're off the clock though there's nothing requiring you to pick up hookers and kill them, it's merely something that the game will allow you to do. Doing this in the game doesn't necessarily make you a bad person in the real world because the people that the game companies want playing this are well-adjusted teens and adults. Another game that can screw you up.
As for why people whip Nintendo for being "family friendly", well, I can answer that one. http://www.filibustercartoons.com/Nintendo.php has a fairly detailed line-by-line of the things Nintendo does to remain "family friendly". Worth a read.
And shouldn't have for a good reason. To be honest though, the only games I've come across that are truly mindless are PC shooters and Nintendo platformers. They're mindless in different ways, but mindless the same "Run. Jump. Stomp; Shoot. Load. Dodge"
-drasnor
That of course is where you miss the point. The inovation within a series is a rehash - that's the whole point of being a series. But Mario DS is a very different playing game then Super Mario. Same characters totally different game play. Actually the DS is a perfect example of innovation. They have made a new method to interact with the games. Advanced Wars is totally different from Pokemon. Hell nintendogs is pretty much a one in a kind game. You are always going to have repeating series and ports. Crossover is important. But if you look at the new games that come out on Nintendo and there is a far greater variety then PS2 or Xbox offer. Just less blood.
I agree that GTA isn't a console maker, but I do remember when Xbox first came out people were chomping at the bit because GTA wasn't being released for it. That however is meaningless. If you look at PS2 or Xbox as of late all you have is repeated rehash. Nintendo is doing different things. They are actually pushing the envolope on how you play the game not just competing for graphics, which is a pointless battle. A console is a toy, nintendo gets this. I love my xbox and between it PS2 and Gamecube it's the best system IMO. However as we are now going into a gen of consoles Nintendo is the only company that is making a new console.
That's what's exciting about the Revolution. They aren't going to just have mario with better graphics. They'll have a mario that you play differently. Nintendo is no longer even competing with PS3 or Xbox in the battle. They are in a new market that they have created. Xbox and PS3 have to battle it out with each other. They have to fight for killer graphics or the next big title. They have put themselves in a market where they can't take chances. So that means that they'll stick to formulaes and series that have worked in the past. Just look at the current release titles for Xbox 360 not a single new game in it. Same old stuff we currently have, some with only marginally better graphics and even that is more a function of HDTV then the game itself.
OH and for tactical espionage I'll take Splinter Cell over Metal Gear solid in a heart beat.
Never disagreed with any of that. But adding mature content doesn't make a game good. It's just a gimmick like any other. GTA at it's heart is a game where you are either racing around on a generally poor racing engine or run around fighting/shooting, with a generally average engine for that. I'm not saying the game isn't fun. It is amuzing but it's a novelty at best. However if you look at all the games that followed like True Crime, 50' cents game and a handful of other games none of them are pushing the game play almost all are just pushing the violence and all of them are forgetable.
So Nintendo releases family friendly games. I'm not arguing that they don't. But they do have 3rd party games that aren't. They have also loosened their policy as they new rating system has come into play. Not sure if you've played Gun at all (great game if you haven't). But you are a cowboy you go around shooting people and scalping them. Basically the exact opposite of a 'family friendly' game. It's out on all platforms.
There, now I put my 2 cents in.
:celebrate
I haven't played Splinter Cell but I'm given to understand it's one of several compelling reasons to own an Xbox, much like Halo, MechAssault, Knights of the Old Republic, and Steel Battalion are. Killer apps are what define the console. I just have more compelling reasons to go with Sony right now, most of which are developed by Namco, Square-Enix, and Nippon Icchi. Nintendo had many excellent developers in their pocket at one point but their asinine attitude toward developers and strict policies drove them away.
I think it's neat that the Revolution is going to be innovative in hardware but I can appreciate that without buying one. I'm fairly comfortable with the state of the RPG genre and where it's headed on the next generation of consoles (longer plots, better graphics). I wish you luck with your system.
-drasnor
Innovation though is key to any development. If they want to push the envolope they have to take risks and try something new. PS3 and xbox can only continue to roll on as they are doing for a limited time. The production costs of developing better graphical games will quickly push the profitibility under. As it is now game companies go under because they nest all their budget in one title and if it flops they die. The more expensive it costs to produce a cutting edge graphical game the fewer companies will be able to create them. Which means that you loose variety and loose that next new game.
But by changing the way you interact with a game you don't have to worry about just souly praising the game based on graphics or the 100hrs of content that only a minority ever see. You can market the game play because after all it's the game play that people remember graphics are always just fluf. They'll make a great game better but they'll never save a poor game.
-drasnor
There aren't any traditional RPGs on the PC that I know of, although I'd love to see them heading to that platform.
But you're totally right about the way development is heading. Developers are under incredible pressure to make graphically gorgeous games, and few have been able to produce a game that looks good and plays well. Those few will the only developers we have left soon, and I know I'll miss the variety.
I still play SNES, N64, and PS1 RPGs (and many for the first time, not just out of nostalgia). Gameplay and plot are far more important than graphics to me. I wish budgets were used to develop a good game, and then make it pretty with whatever money is left over.
I'm working on Star Ocean (SNES) and the new Romancing SaGa (PS2). Gonna steal my brother-in-law's copy of Lunar when I get a chance. MMMM good.
-drasnor
And if you'd read the whole page that you linked to about Nintendo and censorship you'd likely have run across this tidbit:
So calling the Nintendo system a "kiddy" system then flogging the old argument of Nintendo and censorship is just so much BS. Welcome to the 21st century where they don't do that any longer.
What do you mean by traditional RPG? Rpg's have been out a lot longer on PC's before they ever made it to consoles.
-drasnor
I'm thinking of something like Final Fantasy, Suikoden, or Xenosaga.
While games like Dungeon Siege, Morrowind, and the D&D games are certainly RPGs, they're not what I've considered traditional, since I first started playing console RPGs.
Your point is?