View Full Version : $600 Playstation 3 with tilt sensitive controller unveiled!
bluemicrobyte
05-08-2006, 11:37 PM
Behold! Solid, living proof that Sony does indeed copy Nintendo. They delayed the launch of the PS3 by almost a year so they could incorporate an new "innovative" idea they had..... hmmmm
http://revolution.ign.com/articles/705/705870p1.html
And other info about the PS3:
It will be available in two versions: one with a 60GB hard drive, and one with 20GB. It will launch in the US on November 17 for $499 for the 20GB version and $599 for the 60GB one.
The controller has been re-designed. It looks exactly like a playstation 2 controller.
Online multiplayer will be free (unlike Xbox).
Some games will allow you to buy additional in game content such as extra weapons (yes, in addition to the 60 bucks you already shoveled out for the game).
Source: Gamespots summary of the Sony press conference: http://www.gamespot.com/e3/e3story.html?sid=6149470&pid=928399
Sikawtic
05-09-2006, 12:13 AM
I'm in love.
bluemicrobyte
05-09-2006, 12:16 AM
And I'm not. Not only did Sony copy Nintendos original innovative idea for a console controller, but they did a horrible job of it. And the sad part is that in a year people will have been brainwashed to think that Nintendo copied Sony's controller idea.
The PS3 controller has tilt sensitivity. NOT full 3d motion sensitivity. With a PS3 controller you would be able to play games like flight simulator or kirby tilt'n tumble. Only with a revolution controller can you do something like swing a sword or play virtual tennis or aim the controller like a gun. But I'm doing too much talking about promises made a year ago. Let's wait until tommorrow at Nintendos press conference and see what they have in store for us.
And I'm also outraged at the price. Who in their right minds would pay 600 bucks for a console..... plus 60 bucks for ONE game, plus money for seven controllers........ and you haven't even stepped into their in game store yet...... (buying items in game.... MORE costs?!)
Oh for fuck's sake you people, Nintendo weren't the first people to design a motion sensitive device.
bmb -- get a clue. Only the Wii (not revolution) will be cheap. The 360 is just as expensive as the PS3.
And I really doubt that the PS3 was delayed for this. It wasn't even delayed period (I didn't think? It was never planned to be released until this year anyways wasn't it?).
Oh, and FYI: PS3 also has backwards compatibility, so you don't have to go out and buy a game. But if they are offering free internet multiplayer service -- what right have you got to bitch?
Anything you can buy in ame will get hacked anyways (so why worry about that?) so I say enjoy the option that this second controller that the PS3 offers.
Its sad that you think Sony copied Nintendo. Nintendo surely isn't the first company to create a motion sensitive controller =/ And from what i understand, its not anywhere near the same as the Wii's (in terms of control... or whatever).
-Neo
bluemicrobyte
05-09-2006, 2:55 AM
Well, it WAS delayed. The original release date was Spring 2006. The 360 is expensive, but not as expensive as the PS3- 399 < 599 -it's simple math.
Revolution/Wii also has backwards compatibility - with the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, AND Sega Genesis and Hudson's Turbo Grafx 16 (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6146540/index.html).
Yeah, the motion sensing technologies aren't the same. My *theory* is that this is because Sony couldn't figure out how Nintendo managed to accomplish full 3-dimensional motion sensing so they settled with tilt sensitivity. [/theory]
PS: I did watch the Sony Press conference just now, and I must say that I am impressed by the demo they showed at the end with the controller used to control the flight of whatever aircraft that was. It immediately reminded me of the time I connected a tilt sensitive game pad to my PC and ran Starfox64 on emulator and used it the EXACT same way they're using it now. It was fun to mess around with, but not practical. But I can't judge it since i haven't tried it yet.
pixels
05-09-2006, 9:48 AM
they're selling computers now huh.
whatever. the ps3 blows balls.
Well, it WAS delayed. The original release date was Spring 2006. The 360 is expensive, but not as expensive as the PS3- 399 < 599 -it's simple math.
Revolution/Wii also has backwards compatibility - with the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, AND Sega Genesis and Hudson's Turbo Grafx 16 (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6146540/index.html).
Uhm, you just said they have a 499 one? You realize that full xbox 'packages' (ie: like everything you'd expect a 360 to have) has been in the 600-1000 (assuming here, I've seen some packages go as high as that, but not recently)?
Oh noes, the PS3 will be expensive~!!!! ... duh.
Then I claim that Nintendo copied sony! Son'y has offered backwards compatibility since PS2.
Yeah, the motion sensing technologies aren't the same. My *theory* is that this is because Sony couldn't figure out how Nintendo managed to accomplish full 3-dimensional motion sensing so they settled with tilt sensitivity. [/theory]
No, I think its because its supposed to be an optional control device, something that only certain games will use, or allow you the option of using. While the Wii's device is a complete and total replacement for a controller... or whatever. I look at the sony thing as an additional device -- not like Wii's which is a complete replacement.
Oh, and fyi, have you ever played a game where you 'slash' things with a sword? Even using something as simple as a mouse and the keyboard to move is fucking disorienting. If I wanted a real experience with a sword, I would much rather be holding a sword length weapon!
PS: I did watch the Sony Press conference just now, and I must say that I am impressed by the demo they showed at the end with the controller used to control the flight of whatever aircraft that was. It immediately reminded me of the time I connected a tilt sensitive game pad to my PC and ran Starfox64 on emulator and used it the EXACT same way they're using it now. It was fun to mess around with, but not practical. But I can't judge it since i haven't tried it yet.
Thats my point, I see the Sony thingy as just another option for a controller then anything, Wii's is obviously much more advanced, so I don't think they are copying or anything.
pixels, fu. The PS3 does not blow anything.
-Neo
http://www.gamerevolution.com/oldsite/blogpics/powerglove.jpg
3D Motion Sensitive Controller FTW!
Edit: This controller is older than some of our forum members.
http://www.gamerevolution.com/oldsite/blogpics/powerglove.jpg
3D Motion Sensitive Controller FTW!
Edit: This controller is older than some of our forum members.
Smartass.
=P
I remember seeing hype about that when I was younger... or something. I think at least. lol!
-Neo
GenocideAlive
05-09-2006, 4:04 PM
Not that I'm going to particularly weigh in on this fanboi nerdfest of bitching and pissing, but I'm completely underwhelmed by the entirety of next-generation gaming. People are OMFG amazed at screens of these games, and I'm like, "yeah, PCs have been at about that level for a bit now." Consoles are giant moneysinks, where they sell you a sub-par computer and then repeat the process in 5 years. I only buy Nintendo stuff because they have fun family games that are easy for everybody to play. Otherwise, if I want gun violence and a kickass RTS, consoles are sorely lacking.
Not that I'm going to particularly weigh in on this fanboi nerdfest of bitching and pissing, but I'm completely underwhelmed by the entirety of next-generation gaming. People are OMFG amazed at screens of these games, and I'm like, "yeah, PCs have been at about that level for a bit now." Consoles are giant moneysinks, where they sell you a sub-par computer and then repeat the process in 5 years. I only buy Nintendo stuff because they have fun family games that are easy for everybody to play. Otherwise, if I want gun violence and a kickass RTS, consoles are sorely lacking.
I've been looking forward to the PS3 mostly because of its "Cell Processor" thing, but thats the geek in me. Graphics generally have never interested me to much.
-Neo
TheGreatBrain
05-09-2006, 8:08 PM
I would never shell out that much for a console, and a lot of people are going to be turned off by the price too, but there are plenty of people who will rush out to pay every dollar. Also, I'm extremely disappointed that they went back to the old controller design. I don't know if they showed a picture of it in that article, but I hate to see that they just painted the old controller silver and said "problem solved."
EDIT: I can't find the picture I saw. But believe me, it's a letdown.
dunchy
05-09-2006, 8:14 PM
[img]...
Edit: This controller is older than some of our forum members.
I like this picture more...
http://rdtcl.homestead.com/files/powerglove.jpg
I love the power glove, it's so bad.
Moving right along, any of these 'next gen' console games have just been meh to me as well. Nothing that was Halo level when the Xbox first debuted. Nothing '50 times more powerful then the xbox 1' impressive. Very lukewarm to tell you the truth.
SuiCidAl-KiSmEt
05-09-2006, 8:47 PM
Wow, great deal. I remember you could buy a Saga for $100 and the games for $20. Anyways, games are evolving too fast, I don't expect them getting any exspensive. They're so advanced right now. Plus, the free online play sounds good to me.
Me + PS3 + Free Online Play = Set For Life
Dark_Soul74
05-09-2006, 9:16 PM
Ok, few things I want to point out:
A) Sony has definitely copied the Revolution. They already stole the thumbsticks and rumble, and now they add using the controller's physical movements as a key part of gameplay.
B) Nintendo has had backwards compatibility since the GameBoy.
C) The PS3 is going to be obscenely expensive, just like the 360.
D) Nintendo is my favorite because they add innovations with each new generation of platforms. Unlike, of course, the PlayStation and XBox series, which simply "beef up" the old designs or steal new features.
SuiCidAl-KiSmEt
05-09-2006, 9:27 PM
Ya. I did recogonize Nintendo creating new technology for some of their stuff. The Nintendo DS and GameCube is really unique. But a couple kids thought the idea of having the touch screen on the DS was the next generation of gaming was... unpopulare.
But I think that graphic tweaking is the only way to go for the next couple so years. Right now, the new technology isn't that "OMG impressive" enough to change the way how we play games.
Every platform has copied the other in some capacity.
Every aspect of a console is a improvement upon another.
It's pointless to say "they copied Nintendo!!!!!1111111" when Nintendo did the exact same thing to Atari back in the day.
http://www.ps3portal.com/brief-video-game-console-history-timeline.html
Take a look at every innovation that was stolen, copied, hacked, borrowed, etc. Originality is rare, improvement is commonplace.
hammocksleeper
05-09-2006, 10:14 PM
Personally, these new developments make me happy. The "new" controller design was shitty anyway and the original PS/PS2 controller design is better. Free online play is great, no way in hell I would ever pay for an online service like xbox live. The price seems reasonable, moreso than xbox 360 or whatever.
The only thing that upsets me is the fact that the delayed release means it won't be out in time for them to make Madden 07 for it!!
bluemicrobyte
05-09-2006, 11:59 PM
Wow. Just wow.
I just finished watching the Nintendo press conference, and in that moment I changed from "will see if the Wii is sucessful before buying" to "must... reserve.... now!!!!" But seriously, those demos were very, very cool. Especially the Zelda demo - aiming the bow as if it were a real bow. Innovative.
(for those that haven't watched it - they unveiled that there are actually TWO motion sensors, one in the controller and one in the addon thing. there is also a speaker in the controller to add depth of sound (shooting an arrow from the bow to the screen), and that this zelda will be the best yet, and it will be a Wii launch title. They did not reveal the price or exact launch date.)
gatchaman
05-10-2006, 2:02 PM
Backwards capability for all nintendo and sega games alone is the reason I would buy Wii. I watched the press-releases of sony and nintendo. I think nintendo had a more inspiring and dedicated gaming presentation. I go with my feeling. I think sony might regret not having full 3d movement on the controller like wii has. Hopefully, anyway. I feel sorry for nintendo, I guess. They have great games, but they are all seen as too kiddy or something. Maybe it's because they are. I probably won't buy either system. too much money and I don't have the time anymore to waste on games it seems.
Cpt.Chronic
05-11-2006, 5:06 PM
Neo, you're funny...or pathetic...I forget which fits best here. I would refute some of your blatantly false claims, but considering how blinded you are for your PS3, it would serve no purpose.
Neo, you're funny...or pathetic...I forget which fits best here. I would refute some of your blatantly false claims, but considering how blinded you are for your PS3, it would serve no purpose.
False claims? What false claims?
All I was saying was that nintendo wasn't the first company to ever create a motion sensitive device.
To get all pissy at sony because they released a second controller similar to Wii's (inasmuch as that it has motion sensitivity, but not really the same at all) is pretty lame.
-Neo
Cpt.Chronic
05-11-2006, 6:00 PM
Arrghh...why am I replying...sigh...so pointless.
False claims? What false claims?
Not only are your claims false, you are extremely rude in the way you present them (i.e. "for fuck's sake"; "get a clue"; "fu" etc.)
"Nintendo weren't the first people to design a motion sensitive device"
Then who was? ...for videogames mind you.
"It wasn't even delayed period"
Sony admitted that it had to be delayed due to Bluray technology not being ready in time. Their original projection was Spring 2006.
"Anything you can buy in ame will get hacked anyways (so why worry about that?)"
What do you have to back this claim up? Nothing, that's what. If you were to use MicroSoft's Xbox and Xbox360 marketplace as an example (which Sony is copying) you will notice that items for purchase have never been hacked nor available for free unless M$ expressly released them for free further down the road. There are many safegaurds in place to prevent this type of hacking with the most important being that your subscription to the online service is suspended if hack devices such as mod chips are dectected.
"The 360 is just as expensive as the PS3."
No it's not.
"Uhm, you just said they have a 499 one? You realize that full xbox 'packages' (ie: like everything you'd expect a 360 to have) has been in the 600-1000 (assuming here, I've seen some packages go as high as that, but not recently)?"
Those were just stores (i.e. ebgames, gamestop) trying to exploit people addicted to video games (i.e. the early adopters of new systems). The packages were expensive because there was a lot of useless crap offered in them including games that a person may or may not want. You will see a similar strategy when the PS3 is released. But that doesn't change the fact that a "core" X360 costs $299 and the "premium" costs $399. The "core" PS3 will be $499, and the "premium" will be $599. That's a $200 dollar price difference (aka the 360 is not as expensive as the PS3).
"Then I claim that Nintendo copied sony! Son'y has offered backwards compatibility since PS2."
Nintendo has offered it since GameBoy Color.
Arrghh...why am I replying...sigh...so pointless.
Not only are your claims false, you are extremely rude in the way you present them (i.e. "for fuck's sake"; "get a clue"; "fu" etc.)
"Nintendo weren't the first people to design a motion sensitive device"
Then who was? ...for videogames mind you.
O.o Does this even matter? Am I supposed to go dig up motion sensitivity devices in regards to video games to make my point "true"? This really has nothing to do with the topic on hand -- I was annoyed that bmb took the stance that "sony sucks" because they "stole" from nintendo. The point was that there is very little that DOESN'T get "borrowed" in this business.
Besides any of that, as far as I can tell, this PS3 accessory is simply an optional controller thing, its not a total replacement. And baring that, it snot even as powerful/featured as the Wii's. Although I don't know why people are so geared up over such a device. "OH NOES I CAN SWING IT LIKE I WOULD SWORD~!!!!1" Then again, I never understand the interest for headset services (ie: teamspeak/ventrillo/etc...).
"It wasn't even delayed period"
Sony admitted that it had to be delayed due to Bluray technology not being ready in time. Their original projection was Spring 2006.
I love being quoted out of context.
(I didn't think? It was never planned to be released until this year anyways wasn't it?).
Thats the rest of that. I admited that I wasn't sure. Or is this a "lets attack Neo" regardless sort of a thing?
"Anything you can buy in game will get hacked anyways (so why worry about that?)"
What do you have to back this claim up? Nothing, that's what. If you were to use MicroSoft's Xbox and Xbox360 marketplace as an example (which Sony is copying) you will notice that items for purchase have never been hacked nor available for free unless M$ expressly released them for free further down the road. There are many safegaurds in place to prevent this type of hacking with the most important being that your subscription to the online service is suspended if hack devices such as mod chips are dectected.
The way that I understand it is that you will have to buy "access" to certain features of a game.
Oh, and I would like to note: Sony's online area is free to use. From what bmb said, only certain things will "cost" money.
My point was more along the lines of if its on the actual game disc, then its going to be hacked out in some way or another. If its a game that you have to "install" (read: on the HD) then perhaps it won't be as easy to "hack" things if they don't actually exist until you download them.
There is a very large community of Xbox hackers out there, I strongly doubt that the xbox is impervious to anything. Besides any of that, its not as if Microsoft has a strong track record with such things =P
"The 360 is just as expensive as the PS3."
No it's not.
Xbox 360: $399.99
Xbox 360 (Live Bundle, 12 months + a couple of games + wireless adapter, etc...): $759.93
At launch? (If you could find one) was even more expensive then that bundle up top. But then again, thats expected.
"Uhm, you just said they have a 499 one? You realize that full xbox 'packages' (ie: like everything you'd expect a 360 to have) has been in the 600-1000 (assuming here, I've seen some packages go as high as that, but not recently)?"
Those were just stores (i.e. ebgames, gamestop) trying to exploit people addicted to video games (i.e. the early adopters of new systems). The packages were expensive because there was a lot of useless crap offered in them including games that a person may or may not want. You will see a similar strategy when the PS3 is released. But that doesn't change the fact that a "core" X360 costs $299 and the "premium" costs $399. The "core" PS3 will be $499, and the "premium" will be $599. That's a $200 dollar price difference (aka the 360 is not as expensive as the PS3).
That doesn't really matter though. You don't have to buy a "live" subscription to use the online services (what, its like $70 isn't it? =/). The "core" ps3 system isn't stripped either. The 360 core system is almost a joke anyways, you end up having to buy extra things for it to work like advertised -- which ends up costing you as much or more.
"Then I claim that Nintendo copied sony! Son'y has offered backwards compatibility since PS2."
Nintendo has offered it since GameBoy Color.
Thats unfair. I was talking consoles -- Nintendo has been the leader for portable gaming/mobile gaming (whatever you want to call it) for years now. Sony and Microsoft will have a very hard time breaking into the mobile arena -- although the PSP is pretty nifty. Can you imaging an xMini or somesuch?
My point was only this:
To be pissed off because Sony announced a motion sensitive device and then claim it was the reason for the delay in launch is bull and unfair.
I am not anti-Nintendo, infact I think they are probably the only console maker who is still trying to be innovative and stay true to gaming, but I just don't think its fair to attack Sony.
Baring that, I am somewhat anti Xbox. I will continue to be, because I think microsoft just bought thier way in and did nothing else. That and for some ungodly, unfathomable reason, there are millions of people who think FPS games are the best ever =/
Besides, I just think the PS3 has more potential.
The PlayStation 3, unlike the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 systems, is based on open and publicly available application programming interfaces.
Oh, and region-free gaming will be nifty :)
Plus I think BluRay is either going to either rocket off, or fail. One would hope that it would succeed, because of the improvements it brings, but I am still kinda wary about it /rambles on.
-Neo
Cpt.Chronic
05-11-2006, 7:11 PM
See, told you it was pointless. Again, I would reply in detail to you if you weren't such a blind Sony fanboy that gets his panties in wad any time anyone mentions something bad about the PS3.
You asked me to point out your false claims, which I did. After I gave multiple examples of your claims being false, you replied with such rock solid retorts as, "Does this even matter?" or "That doesn't really matter though." or "Thats unfair." None of your replies change the fact that your claims were false, period.
Oh, and when you use the word "period" at the end of a sentence that indicates that this is what you believe, no ifs, ands, or buts about it (i.e. "It wasn't even delayed period"). If you don't know what you're talking, which you obviously don't, then don't try to present yourself as some all-knowing expert and expect people to believe you just because you use definitive language.
Dark_Soul74
05-11-2006, 7:46 PM
To get all pissy at sony because they released a second controller similar to Wii's (inasmuch as that it has motion sensitivity, but not really the same at all) is pretty lame.Oh, right, because them adding it directly after Nintendo revealed they had it is SO OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THEY DEVELOPED ON THEIR OWN. They're deliberately adding features last minute to try to get a lead on Nintendo, rather than relying on their own ingenuity.
Although I don't know why people are so geared up over such a device. "OH NOES I CAN SWING IT LIKE I WOULD SWORD~!!!!1".People like the "physical" interaction the Wii will provide because it's different and new. It's not just the same R/C feeling you get when you play other games, because your physical movements exactly mirror what will happen in the game.
Thats unfair. I was talking consoles -- Nintendo has been the leader for portable gaming/mobile gaming (whatever you want to call it) for years now. Sony and Microsoft will have a very hard time breaking into the mobile arena -- although the PSP is pretty nifty. Can you imaging an xMini or somesuch?Oh boo hooh. You don't plug the GameBoy into your TV, so the point is invalid? To quote you, fu
You're being extremely rude for a moderator, and getting pissed when your arguments are disproved. So chill out.
See, told you it was pointless. Again, I would reply in detail to you if you weren't such a blind Sony fanboy that gets his panties in wad any time anyone mentions something bad about the PS3.
You asked me to point out your false claims, which I did. After I gave multiple examples of your claims being false, you replied with such rock solid retorts as, "Does this even matter?" or "That doesn't really matter though." or "Thats unfair." None of your replies change the fact that your claims were false, period.
Oh, and when you use the word "period" at the end of a sentence that indicates that this is what you believe, no ifs, ands, or buts about it (i.e. "It wasn't even delayed period"). If you don't know what you're talking, which you obviously don't, then don't try to present yourself as some all-knowing expert and expect people to believe you just because you use definitive language.
Oh, so if i don't like Xbox it suddenly means I'm a sony fanboy? :(
If your not even going to take the time to respond to my post (past the few comments taken out of context) then just don't bother.
Should I simply assume this is the standard "he responded, but I don't really want to, so I'll post something that really amounts to nothing" response?
Oh boo hooh. You don't plug the GameBoy into your TV, so the point is invalid? To quote you,
I said I was talking about consoles -- which was apparently unclear, so I felt the need to point that out. No its not invalid because you don't plug your GB into the tv (which is a wierd argument, since you CAN do that anyways), its "invalid" because I was talking about consoles.
-Neo
Dark_Soul74
05-11-2006, 8:27 PM
Should I simply assume this is the standard "he responded, but I don't really want to, so I'll post something that really amounts to nothing" response?He can't respond to you saying that the point is irrelevant, and chances are he's fed up with you stating half facts like "that the XBox with a few games and the full package being about $750", or the price of a PS3 and only three games, not to mention any memory cards, internet adapters[which may or may not be optional], or anything other than a system, controller, and power and A/V cables.
I said I was talking about consoles -- which was apparently unclear, so I felt the need to point that out. No its not invalid because you don't plug your GB into the tv (which is a wierd argument, since you CAN do that anyways), its "invalid" because I was talking about consoles.Gaming is gaming. Does portablity really matter? You can plug GameBoys into TVs, yes, but you can also play with a PS2 as a portable game. THAT is not disputable when it comes to features.
dunchy
05-11-2006, 8:38 PM
Mind if I join in here fellas?
For starters, I like your posting style Capt. it's nice on the eyes not having those quotes everywhere. I thank you for that.
Neo, one thing that striked me and now in the forefront is the motion sensitivity controller. For a console, what company was the first that Nintendo copied that you so claim? For my memory, this would be the first one, outside of course the rumble pack, which Nintendo made anyhow.
Second, the hacking issue. For those following the Scene, the 360 is about 50-60% hacked. There's a temporary hack going around, but the problem is that the games run intermittent < if I even spelt that correctly I'm not sure. I think Neo's point was that every console out now gets hacked within a year or so, I'm not sure on the Gamecube though and how long it took to hack that system.
Prices anyhow? Damn straight PS3 is going to be lots more then 360 on release date. With demand going to be very high for Ps3, and all the 'extra' periphs/content you can buy, I'd guess between a 300-400 dollar difference between the two. Is it to be considered Microsoft will drop the price of the 360 to compete with the Ps3? My dollar says yes. That's the main reason I'm holding off on the 360 for the moment.
Something that caught my eye was this, this is for you Neo: "To be pissed off because Sony announced a motion sensitive device and then claim it was the reason for the delay in launch is bull and unfair."
I can believe it's unfair and bull, but I'm not sure that's the main reason the console is delayed. Keep in mind the architecture of the ps3. Sony could say whatever they want for an excuse to delay the console, but we all know...
And if there's one little bit of advice dude? Slow down Neo, slow the post ranting down. There's almost too much information your putting out for us at once it can easily sidetrack you, if it hasen't happened before. Just give your posts a bit more lookover before hitting that submit reply button, if you can please. Just some advice from an old forumer.
Cronic, what's your take on the Ps3 coming out?
Cpt.Chronic
05-11-2006, 9:49 PM
Cronic, what's your take on the Ps3 coming out?
Well, I still think it's a little early to make any solid claims about what it will or will not be, but at least we now have some in game footage/screens, and unfortunately they're not quite the quality of what they showed at E3 last year. And by "not quite," I mean, not anywhere even close. The one thing that I dislike about Sony is how they try to mislead consumers on a constant basis. They did it with the PS2, and now they've done it with the PS3. Last E3 they swore up and down that the footage they showed was "in-game" and not pre-rendered, but anyone with a little bit of common sense could tell this was just them getting their PS3 hype machine started. I mean, the final developer's kits weren't even created yet so how could they have multiple games showcasing photo-realistic graphics. They couldn't.
I've been holding off on buying any next gen console because they're expensive and so are the games. Each generation, buying a console becomes more and more of an investment, and as such one must compare/contrast what he really wants in a console. Personally, I don't have an HDTV so Bluray is not a very big selling point for me. Online play is fun, but I mainly reserve that for StarCraft and very few select FPS's.
I'm looking more at the games than the features. Right now, X360 really only has one must-have game for me and that's Oblivion, which will most likely be coming to PS3 even though they haven't announced it. I remember reading an interview with the head developer of Bethesda that said the only reason Morrowind was Xbox exclusive was because it was the only console that could run it. I'm guessing that it's a time exclusive deal that Bethesda has with M$ for Oblivion, similar to the deal RockStar has with Sony for the GTA series.
So I'm going to wait and see how the games on the PS3 actually turn out before making a decision to buy one over the other (unfortunately, the Nintendo games just don't interest me, although that could change with their new controller if developers take advantage of it). I think the PS3 has the potential for some really innovate games if developers will fully utilize the Cell's functionality, but that too has yet to be seen, and from what I hear the PS3 will be the most difficult console to develop for to-date.
Oh, and about the whole controller thing...well, I think this tilt function that they have included is a bit of a gimmick, although I can't say for sure since I haven't played with one. It seems the only reason that they did this was because they could no longer use the rumble technology that they had been using without paying royalty fees-- royalty fees that would partially go towards M$ because they bought a percentage of the company that holds the patent.
The last thing I want to mention is that I think it's extremely ballsy for Sony to include Bluray with their console considering Bluray players are selling for what, 1,000 dollars at the moment, and the fact that only a very small percentage of TV owners own an HD-TV? In fact, it's so ballsy, that it could be their downfall. If HD-DVD wins this hi-def movie war, Sony will have wasted not millions, but billions of dollars on a moot technology. Only time will tell though.
Darkslayer633
05-11-2006, 10:05 PM
I personally will gladly shell out 656 CAD + taxes ad will be waiting at teh store at 4am for opening to get the first one on shipping day. then provided I have teh money, I am going to buy every launch title. fanboy? damn striaght
U-238
05-11-2006, 10:20 PM
Nah. $800 isn't worth it. I'd sooner stick with my old N64. (Yea I'm that far behind)
bluemicrobyte
05-11-2006, 11:29 PM
We're all still seeing this from a gamers point of view.
Nintendo has said repeatedly that with the Nintendo Wii, they hope to expand the gaming industry so that games are as common as TVs - everyone uses them. Nintendo is marketing towards all ages and all genders by creating a system that is not intimidating to non-gamers, and that is affordable for a typical american family.
They're also making games that are appealing to both genders - violence mainly appeals to males and, in my opinion, this is why Nintendo will succeed over Sony and Microsoft. Both of those companies are showing off expensive violent games that appeal to male gamers, ages 16-30. Nintendo is showing off games that are supposed to appeal to various age groups, and both genders.
When it really comes down to it, would the average american that doesn't play games (which is a larger percentage than people who DO play games) rather pay 600 bucks for something that shows violence and requires the use of a strange device with 20(?) buttons and two joysticks (the average non-gamer does not use a joystick in every day life), or would they rather pay a lower price (maybe $200-250?) for a "fun" looking game that is played with something that looks like a TV remote?
^meh, most people have played some games.
But I <3 nintendo for not making their price insane. My family could not afford a 600 dollar console(plus games and other stuff). I still don't have a gamecube, and I got my first GBA a few months ago. I'm way behind, ya.
Also, I tend to like nintendo because I don't like the violence most games have. Usually because those games are lame. (Halo is great, and there's not a horrible amount of gore) If I get any next gen console, it will be the Wii.
I'd like to note that the PS3 ('premium' package) includes anything you would need (including wireless/hdmi/etc... -- ie: you don't have to buy anything extra). With an Xbox360 -- even a premium version -- you have to buy a wireless adapter (if you have a wireless network), xbox live membership... Thats like what, 180 more?
Plus factor in the fact that PS3's online gaming is free -- means that, in the long run, you will be paying less for a PS3 then an Xbox360.
I'm interested to know why microsoft has been left out about this rant of stealing features, the last I checked they are offering old arcade games on the 360, and looking into a motion sensitive device of thier own O_o.
Personally I am looking more and more towards the Wii;
Comes with Opera (O_o;;; -- omg switch between gamefaqs and your game ^_^)
Backwards compatible with damn near every snes/nes and even sega games and stuff. Thats pretty cool, although that will apply only to diehard fans, and possibly adults.
Price rumours to be around $200, which blows both 360 and PS3 out of the water.
Oh, and the Wiimote (haha) is optional. You will still be able to use standard remote controllers (I think even GCN's?), which is most important to me, since I don't see the interest in motion sensitivity (play games to relax... not work out, ya know?, although it does open up an interesting route for browsing and the like).
Iunno. HD shit just doesn't interest me all that much.
And I think BluRay might be a good bet... at least for geeks :/ I think the idea of fitting that much onto a disc would be awesome. Factor in the possibility of PS3 games being able to take up that much space and it becomes obvious that game makers won't have to limit themselves =D Haha; FF13; 80% FMVs ^_^
I just don't think HD DVDs are going to cut it... though its been awhile since I've looked at either, if we are going to release a new mainstream media, then I want one that holds a shitload more then our current DVDs.
And I'm not to worried about BluRay players being so expensive... Anyone remember when DVD players first came out? ;)
*drool* 25/50gb on a disc, 9hours of HD quality stuff on the 50gigger. Effing awesome =D
Isn't oblivion already out on the PC? I'd rather chuck 400 or 500 to upgrading the PC to handle Oblivion before shelling out for the 360.
EDIT: Plus I really think the fact that the PS3 is adopting open stuff is pretty neet. Although the average gamer probably doesn't care about that.
-Neo
bluemicrobyte
05-13-2006, 1:17 AM
Plus factor in the fact that PS3's online gaming is free -- means that, in the long run, you will be paying less for a PS3 then an Xbox360.
This is true. Both Nintendo and Sony have made online gameplay free.... I wonder why Micro$oft continues to charge its users for everything?
I'm interested to know why microsoft has been left out about this rant of stealing features, the last I checked they are offering old arcade games on the 360, and looking into a motion sensitive device of thier own O_o.
Hmmm, that's an interesting question. I would say because Sony and Nintendo both have large dedicated fanbases which have been around longer. In my opinion, the arcade games feature was copied off of Nintendo's idea of having downloadable classics -- but I also agree with the viewpoint that the concept of downloading older games is not something Nintendo deserves credit for inventing, and therefore Microsoft doesn't deserve to be blamed for "stealing" it since it's something anyone could have come up with.
Oh, and the Wiimote (haha) is optional. You will still be able to use standard remote controllers (I think even GCN's?), which is most important to me, since I don't see the interest in motion sensitivity (play games to relax... not work out, ya know?, although it does open up an interesting route for browsing and the like).
Hehe, finally someone who understands this! Nearly every person I've talked to doesn't seem to realize that the "wiimote" is completely optional for developers to make use of.
What I also find interesting is that the people that bash the Wii are the people that haven't tried it (which, of course, is everyone). I haven't read a single bad review about the Wii from someone who's actually tried it. Most reviews said that it was incredibly intuitive and that it was super easy to use. Anyone still think that two joysticks are better than "point and shoot" for an FPS game?
--------------
And going back to that idea of "who actually invented the motion sensor for a game controller" I would first point out that the idea has been messed with by many companies (as far as I know) for quite some time. However, no company has ever succesfully created a motion sensor that can detect full 3D motion including speed and direction of movement. I actually own a gamepad with a tilt sensor very similar to the one Sony showed off in the PS3 controller -- a few years ago I remember using it with an N64 emulator to play Starfox64 with the tilt sensor -- it was really cool at first, but after a while it just wasn't practical to use tilt since it didn't give me the accurate control that a joystick did. Hopefully the Wii remote will be accurate enough that it will work better than joysticks, and from what I've read so far it's incredibly accurate.
Actually if Sony had done more with the Eye Toy we could've seen a whole new 'leap' in 'motion sensitivity' (ie: imagine using your whole body as the motion... thingy...).
Oh well. I will still be looking into a Wii if nothing else.
The only way I would get a PS3 is if FF13 turns out uber good -- or KH3 ends up on PS3 (although not having played KH2 through yet, I don't know if that would be viable).
Wii is just so... neat. I could play old FFs and stuff ^_^ (although, I can do that now on the 'puter with my usb controllers, its just not the same you know?)
-Neo
bluemicrobyte
05-13-2006, 3:54 AM
Hmmm yeah, that would be cool.... but it reminds me of those old webcam games..... blaah
Well I'm not actually that interested in EyeToy, but I remember seeing a similar comment elsewhere and thought I'd bring it up.
The EyeToy is a very strange device, I wonder what happened to cause it to pop up heh.
-Neo
Modred
05-13-2006, 12:43 PM
To answer a question about the controller, according to what I've read, the Wii has a panel on the side that flips up to reveal four GCN controller slots. That was back several months ago that I saw this, and it was from Nintendo, but it could have changed slightly by now. But assuming the Wii is still backwards compatible with GCN game discs, it would make sense to make it compatible with the GCN controller.
And also, continuing on the path of Opera plus a low price, the Wii could be the centerpiece for a home entertainment unit (if only it played CDs and DVDs too, I don't know if it will). Nintendo is aiming to take over your house! Seriously, a $200 or so console that definitely plays games and goes online (out of the box!) versus a cheap, $300 Dell that can barely run Windows XP? And for the price of PS3, you could get a decent, entry-level computer. Of course, this is all speculative, but seems very possible.
It depends on the Wii's specs, I've ont looked them up, but if it takes standard sized discs...
Here;
Slot-loading optical disc drive compatible with:
* 12 cm Wii optical discs
* 8.0 cm GameCube optical discs
* Standard DVDs, CDs
Which means we might even see the ability for it to play MP3s and such.
-Neo
bluemicrobyte
05-13-2006, 5:13 PM
All you ever wanted to know about the Wii:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6146540/index.html
pixels
05-13-2006, 8:25 PM
Which means we might even see the ability for it to play MP3s and such.
what cant play mp3s.
seriously.
That article is a bit old bmb, theres more info @ wikipedia (and other sources). Heck, its still called the Revolution there =P
Nifty that it can handle dvds/cds as well.
-Neo
bluemicrobyte
05-14-2006, 2:06 AM
*checks link* says Wii on my screen (except in the page title). It also says updated May 11, 2006...... anyways.............
Lmao. The title says revolution :(
Wikipedia has more technical specs at any rate.
The virtual console "for a fee" bit is going to put me off =/ If I have to pay everytime I play a game...
-Neo
Dark_Soul74
05-14-2006, 6:39 PM
The virtual console "for a fee" bit is going to put me off =/ If I have to pay everytime I play a game...
Oh poo, then it'd be just like buying them, wouldn't it? :P
bluemicrobyte
05-14-2006, 6:52 PM
Lmao. The title says revolution :(
Wikipedia has more technical specs at any rate.
The virtual console "for a fee" bit is going to put me off =/ If I have to pay everytime I play a game...
-Neo
I believe that Nintendo plans to use some sort of micropayment system like iTunes -- a small cost to buy a game then you have unlimited access to it. I'm guessing games will cost between 99 cents and 2 dollars. But that's up to Nintendo to decide on and announce later this year.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.