What the hell is going on with the PS3?
 

Maddens apparantly shit compared to the 360 version (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/14/us...-360-over-ps3/ and http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/14/ea...e-rate-issues/ ), the next Splinter Cell is not coming out on PS3 because "it can't handle the AI (http://www.gameplayer.com.au/Home/PR...af49&v7Pager=3 ) and Assassins Creed will have better AI on the 360 (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/29/as...soft-producer/ ).

Honestly, I know people may not have gotten to grips with the PS3 yet, but if it has all this power, I would have thought ports would be easy. Take PS2 Vs. XBox and Gamecube for example, all the ports were much better on the latter systems, sharper images running at 60fps. It was easy for them to exploit that extra power straight out of the gate (with one exception, MGS2 on XBox slowed down when it rained). My theory about Madden was the lack of a PS3 Scaler chip, meaning that games are put in a higher or lower resolution in software using up a lot of extra processing power whereas the 360 just dumps that job onto a seperate chip, but can it make that much difference when it comes to programming AI and the like?

I'm sure a lot of people shelled out for a PS3 because they thought they were getting a better console for all these multi-console games. But of the average PS3 owner goes down his friends house to play Madden on his 360 and notices this, he's gonna feel a bit ripped off.

Maybe it is developers having trouble getting used to it but Sony should help them, their entire push for this console is that it's the most powerful thing going and they should do everything to improve that even if it means sending some of their own resources to 3rd parties to help them. But if it's their actual architecture, then that is one huge fuck up.

Anyways, question is, knowing the above facts, would it sway you more towards a 360 if you were going to get a PS3?

It sucks.

PS3 sucks and I laugh at all the early adopters on sight.

I want it to succeed I really do; cause I don't wanna down $500+ for MGS4 and Tekken 6 alone. And I rather play DMC4 on a PS controller. But it appears Sony is forcing my hand.

I was originally going to get the PS3, but after the delay of the launch in europe and what seemed to be problem after problem, I went for the 360. I have not regretted it. I :heart: my 360.

We were talking so much shit on 360 and apparently its the preferred console of TPdub now.

Crow taste good.

Yeah when 360 first came out I was a Sony fanboy and was like 360 sucks fuck Bill Gates. I've definately changed my tone since then.

If I didn't own either system and was looking to buy one, I would probably buy a 360 over the PS3.

So what's changed? Sony's still getting the short end due to shitty support we knew was coming.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you tards woke up and all, but really, has anything changed?

Wii :heart: 4 lyfe

But I do enjoy my 360.

Wii

I'm loving my 360, too.

And we still have the WWE game titles to look forward too.

Aw, shit, I want PS3 to do well, but c'mon Sony. Give me a reason to continue my campaign of saying that Joystiq.com is just being as anti-Sony as they've been. You even got me wanting a Wii over a PS3 (which I thought wasn't EVER going to happen).

Give you a reason to keep being a retard?

You've got plenty, why hang on to this one?

I mean, seriously, when part of your marketing tactics include talking about how hard it is to program for your system, you're fucked. That's not bias, that's not hate, that's just reality.

But if you're really that hard up to continue your campaign of stupidity, more power to you.

But see, the point of this is that when I first saw Joystiq being anti-Sony, I figured it was just biased....no, wait, I WANTED it to be biased because, c'mon, this is SONY we're talking about. They took over all of the video gaming titles over time.

But now look. We have so many issues with the PS3 now (granted, and to be fair, the 360 has that "red ring of death" that'll make the PS3 look more attractive anytime for said games, and signs point to no for any of these making it onto the Wii (sans Madden), although AC would be killer on the Wii), one would think that the killer press conference that they gave at E3 was all for naught. They set their stakes high right now, and they have to deliver. I'm hopeful they really can.

Sony = Overly confident tards

Lol. Its safe to say i learned to not be an early adopter a loooooooooooooooong time ago. I bought the Saturn when it came out, the 32x, etc. Why? Well...because Sega, much like Sony, had some MAJOR success in the past, so they possibly CANT go wrong, right? My ass. Im glad ive stayed away from the PS3 so far, and will continue to until it builds a strong library, not just 3 good games coming out in the near future.

Oh, and Cowlicks, i need your myspace so i can add you again, myspace killed my other account.

You were looking to make someone out to be biased because....

Yeah, there's a reason I swapped my PS3 for a Wii, and Replaced my xbox 360, even after it fucked out. PS3 is balls, and it's only downhill from here.

And yes, I am eating Humble Pie KK :)

Meh. I'm not one to gloat. I'm just curious why people have suddenly changed their minds, though we knew this was the case all along. We knew support was going to be shite, at least for the first couple of years, and that the harder to code systems usually get shafted. We knew it was expensive, a deterrent, and that people who wanted to make money on our games are drawn away from prohibitive systems.

I got frustrated with the fact the graphics were fucking terrible, and the fact they used software emulation for the PS2 games on the NZ consoles. Also, the controller is balls.

I thought you died or something. I'll send a request.

My friend just got Madden 08 for PS3 and I must say it's iffy compared to 360. I mean... where's all that power going to if it can barely run a game at 30fps? Sony has issues and if it wants to survive this gen without becoming a laughing stock they need to wise up and stop with the delusions.

I find it scary that you just listed the only reasons I would also want a PS3

Oh and Wii > anything else right now

I prefer game play over better graphics

You just contradicted yourself.

You are correct.

Not a single one of the many hit Xbox 360 games have great gameplay.

Nor do any of the original xbox games.

Oh Good Lord, no. They're awful. And Wii games? The gameplay is awesome, and specifically not nonexistant.

Especially Red Steel. Can we get a game of the year award over here?

Oh, and Medal of Honor.

IMO!

YO is TFR, DY

While no FPS on the Wii has been any good yet, let's wait for next Tuesday. If they can't pull off Metroid Prime 3, I will write off FPS's on the Wii alltogether...

So we'll finally have a FPS with good gameplay. Now all we need is some for other genres.

A friend of mine bought a PS3 a few days ago, and we've been playing it like crazy. I love it.

Playing what? The dashboard?!? Now that's silly.

The Metroid Prime series is an FPA. So even tho it's awesome, the wii still doesn't have a good true fps.

We've only been playing Resistance: Fall of Man, because that's the only game he bought with it. It's been brutal online.

I have little interest in the PS3 other than fighters and certain exclusives like GoW III. That probably means I won't be picking one up for like 4 years when they retail for $200.

My next console puchase will no doubt be a 360, followed by a Wii of my own.

Artificial distinction.

Yeah, just bein a prick.

But it does have a completely different feel too it than any other FPS. Hard to explain exactly.

:D

I don't like Metroid Prime anyway. None of them tickled. I'm sure they're like awesome multiplayer party casual fun or whatever, but.

Metroid died when they took it the FPS route. Prime was the most terrible FPS I have ever played. They should have reinvented the shooting platformer for 3D, not jumped on the "OMFG FPS" bandwagon.

I'm just glad they didn't fuck Megaman up like that.

That's more or less how I felt about them changing Zelda up. I know people are all "It's Zelda, so OMFG DROOOOOOL," But fuck 'em.

MP: 3 has been REALLY fuckn sweet. And I HATE the FPS genre. Wii really makes them worth playing.

I see where you're coming from, but they at least reinvented it to 3D where it didn't drastically alter the premise. It was the same basic thing only with another plane to work with. Prime took a platformer and shoved it into another genre.

I dunno, the whole appeal of the prime series is that it still feels like metroid, despite the shift in genre. Thats what sets itapart from other fps games enough to garner the FPA label. I guess some people don't feel that way about it, but you guys are in the minority.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pAiU9Fs9FHI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pAiU9Fs9FHI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1yAtybU2B3k"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1yAtybU2B3k" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P2XEPwsUZ4I"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P2XEPwsUZ4I" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Gay.

1) You're not playing it.

2) The person that uploaded these didn't have the best video capture.

3) I think multiplayer could be in the works in an update that RetroStudios could do.

Plus, regardless of what anyone else says, the MP series is a great series, because the feel of Metroid, as has been said, has not been lost. Secrets are still tucked away in such a way that you'll find them if you just LOOK for them, if you're good, the challenge level will satisfy you, the story is pretty good, and the controls a smooth and fluid.

It's basically one of the better GC games (though the first MP is better than Echoes, IMO, but Echoes is significantly harder).

Gay.

Because there's only one side to the argument, right?

Never said that. I meant in my eyes, and according to the sales that each game has had, many people have enjoyed the series.

I know that, I was just breaking your balls.

Anyway, most console FPS's are shit, whether they're ports or not. I can say this because I've played a very large portion of them.

Goldeneye was ok, but it's more like piss on top of a year old shit pile.

Gears of War is probably the best, and I had problems with that too.

I suppose I'm a traditionalist and a prick for preferring mouse and keyboard over controllers and even 'point and shooters', but I never saw Prime as a viable sequel to the original Metroids and as a standalone series it's terrible. They should have gone platforming third person shooter as far as I'm concerned.

Can't wait for the FPS version of Contra. :roll:

Yeah, that was one of the major issues that people were having when the first game was announced and people saw it for the first time.

It still has that Metroid feel for me, though, and I think Retro did a good job with it.

Though I think the sequel, Echoes, was somewhat convluted, though still good. The limited weapon system that had, along with some side plots that went nowhere for a while didn't help it (though the two world system was pretty cool).

Rainbow Six: Vegas was/is tits.

I hope you're not talking about Goldeneye on N64, because that game was badass for its time, especially the multiplayer.

Gears of War is far from the best. The entire game is a glitchfest, and there are so many little things that happen in it that just piss you off like trying to dive off a ledge and rolling in place. Come on.. how could they overlook that? It happens ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

I would think that for being MS's flagship shooter game for the 360 at the moment, it would have been a lot more than just pretty graphics. Comparitively speaking, R6 Vegas has a lot more people playing it at all times of the day.

I used to be a big PC FPS guy, but after playing the 360 for so long now, I have to say I'm very used to the control scheme and it is much easier if you are used to it.

So...is Metal Gear 4 really going to be exclusive to the PS3.

Like really really?

Doubt it in the current state Sony's in.

Wait. When do the se Glitches in Gears happen? I've NEVER seen one.

Gears isn't even a FPS

I'm talking about online play, because in shooters that's all I really care about unless it's something like Bioshock or Half-Life. I'm not talking about glitches where the game fucks up in single player.

Now, as for glitches that exist online:
Crabwalking/roadie walk, the Air Walk, back flip up walls, the instant chainsaw glitch (where you chainsaw one person, do a quick button combo and can chainsaw the next person instantly without chargeup), the host slide, getting on top of objects you are supposed to jump over, long jumping over objects (and by long jumping, I mean flying forward a good 20 feet really quickly), -climbing walls-. There is a glitch to where you simply switch to your lancer and it instantly chainsaws someone. There are even glitches to counter glitches such as the chainsaw glitch or double punch.

Etc.. etc.. The game is FILLED with them. There are more, but the above are the 'game-breaking' ones. The others are just for visual effect mostly and don't really make things retarded.

It's a shooter, and that's what he was talking about. It's the same genre.

Not really first thing he says is how much he hates console FPS then turns around and says Gears is the best one. Which it can't be since it's a TPS

What part of same genre don't you understand? They are the same concept, they play relatively the same. You shoot people in both, they share a reticle in the center of the screen, and the idea is to shoot a gun at someone. The only difference is the viewpoint. I understand that they have different names, but it is the same genre of game and you are just being a difficult twat about it for the sake of it.

I think it's because a FPS is put in a diffferent spectrum than a TPS. For some reason, gamers classify FPS differently that TPS. It's graded on a different scale. Usually, in a TPS, you don't necessarily have to swing your character 180 degrees to see something behind you, something one must consider in a FPSs, and a FPS will have a ton of different control specs that need to be considered whereas TPSs may not have the same feel to them.

I'm not sure if I explained this right, but I'm trying to say that you're half right. While they are in the same genre of "shooter", what she is saying is that Gears is not played entirely in the FP perspective like Doom or Metroid Prime is, which is why it can't really be considered a TRUE FPS.

Jesus Christ darkpower, did you not see in my post that you QUOTED, that I said "I understand that they have different names"? And Gears doesn't have any 'different' control schemes, with exception of the fact that 'A' does actions such as wall grabbing, running, hopping over walls, etc. R6 is a FPS, but it has very similar controls to GoW, the main difference being that R6 doesn't have rolling, or have melee/punch, and to change weapons you hold Y and -then- use the D-pad) - It also has wall grabbing and when grabbed to a wall, it switches to a third person view.

The only reason the games may feel different is because in one, you are looking right down the barrel of your gun. In the other, the camera is -swinging- behind you so it feels different, maybe even a bit more sluggish. If Gears was in first person, it would still play mostly the same, but it would seem different because of the viewpoint.

Does -he- think Gears is an FPS? Well if he was actually meaning it when he said it then he's an idiot. But to me it seems rather obvious that he was simply referring to shooters in general, since there are hardly enough popular third person shooters to warrant discerning between the two.

Edit: Just for some more clarification. TPS games are usually along the lines of Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Splinter Cell (spy side only, Mercs were FP), GTA can even be considered a TPS, though it has driving and RPGish parts to put it in a different genre.
Gears, although classified as a TPS, would control exactly the same were it in first-person view, where as most TPS games allow camera control, hence the point of it being third person. Gears simply did it for visual effect, and it's more annoying than cool as it blocks your view half the time.

All that aside, Gears is a shitty, glitch-filled game with pretty graphics. It is not the best shooter out, and will never be the best shooter out, because it will never become fully fixed due to Microsoft most likely dumping it as soon as Halo 3 is released. Support for the game will probably be cut in half instantly.

All that aside, and you're just being twats for the sake of it. No, Gears isn't an FPS. Yes it is a shooter and is in the same genre with very LITTLE difference from FPS games. Therefore when talking about shooters in general, he said FPS when he obviously knows the difference as he stated something about a third person shooter later in his post.

I think you all just got Reqed

however I enjoy Gears Of War(Stranglehold's better)

lol @ fanboy battles.

I own all 3 systems and i'm happy with all 3 of them.

The phrase, "More money than sense" comes to mind.

Dude hate to break it to ya but Resident Evil (other than 4) isn't a true TPS, it's third person Survival horror, less emphasis on shooting more emphasis on simply not dying. Metal Gear Solid is a third person stealth, again less emphasis on shooting, Splinter Cell even more emphasis on Stealth. None of the games you listed are quintessential third person shooter games.

Max Payne, Gears, Lost Planet, Stranglehold are true third person shooters, since their game play revolves almost completely around shooting

Dude his entire post was about Console FPS.

Every game he mentioned exept Gears was an FPS. Goldeneye = FPS, Metroid Prime = FPS

He didn't say console shooters are shit and that Gears is the best one he specifically said Console FPS are shit and that Gears was the best one, which it's not because it's a TPS.

If he had just said shooters then you would be right.

I'll admit I was wrong on Gears, I hadn't played it in a while and since it plays EXACTLY like an FPS should I automatically lumped it in.

You can't deny if that game was first person it wouldn't be changed a bit though...

Still, doesn't change my opinion. Gears is the best "SHOOOOOTTTEEERRR" I've come across on Consoles, FPS or TPS. And it's pretty bad control-wise, the others are a shitload worse. I've never come across an FPS-like game on consoles that I truly enjoyed.

I'll give you that it is much closer to an FPS than most TPS.

Anyway, Bioshock is the best console shooter anyway imo

It's a lot like an arcade shooter, really.

You can call them whatever you want, but they are still third person shooters. I never said they were "pure TPS games" as you put it, but they -are- TPS games. So I really don't know what you're arguing, and Xeno already clarified his reason which simply supports everything I was arguing in the first place.

Pretty much everything you are saying is just coming out as "blah blah blah" because it's obvious that you didn't get the point of what I quite literally spelled out for you in detail. I even stated.. and I quote - "Therefore when talking about shooters in general, he said FPS when he obviously knows the difference as he stated something about a third person shooter later in his post."

Now you're just arguing because you ran out of valid points in the original argument. I've pretty much covered everything. Go have a sex change or something.

First person = camera is "within the eyes" of the character you're controlling.

Third person = camera is "over the shoulder" or "to the side/front/back" of the character.

It's the POV that is different. And hardcore gamers seem to see that as a HUGE difference.

Die in a fire.

Good thing we have darkpower here to clarify the difference between third and first person. I didn't get it when it was stated in like 5 previous posts.

Oh my god. Dude, (pun intended) just because they fall into other categories doesn't mean they aren't third person shooters. RE, MGS, and SC are all third person shooters.

This thread is out of control!!!

I can't sleep until I know whether Super Mario 64 is a TPS or not!

Platform, fyi.

:p

I would hope so. I was referring to Mr. "FPS and TPS are the same thing regardless" over there that seemed to need further clarification.

You're an idiot. Since you apparently don't get the point of anything I repeatedly said in great detail, I'll put it in retard terms so you can understand it.

1. Argument starts when Lara Emily points out that Gears isn't an FPS. Duh, no shit.
2. I state that it's pretty obvious that he was discussing shooters regardless of the terms he used in his original post since he could obviously point out that there were indeed different types of shooters since he referred to a TPS later in the same post.
3. Lara Emily points out the exact same thing again.
4. I state that there is really no need to differentiate between the two in the current context since Gears plays exactly like an FPS and would play no differently if it was in a first-person perspective, thus pretty easy to consider it one in the same regardless of viewpoint.
5. Since apparently you can't see that I made it more than clear in nearly all of my posts that I know the difference between the two, that makes you a full blown retard who shouldn't have access to the internet until you take some reading lessons.
6. Read post #66 you fucking moron.
7. Double read post #66 you fucking moron.
8. Triple read post #66 you freaking idiot. (had to change it up there)
If you had bothered to, you would see that I CLEARLY know what the difference between a FPS and a TPS is.
9. Xero confirmed everything I argued when he gave his reasoning behind stating it like he did.
10. Die in a fire, darkpower.

In short, it doesn't take a genius to realize the difference in the viewpoints of a TPS and FPS game, but apparently it does take a genius to read properly.

I'm not angry. I'm annoyed at the fact that you're such a flaming retard. Now I know what Kane Knight goes through when he argues with me, which almost makes me sorry about it. But then, it's Kane Knight and it's strangely satisfying arguing with him.

Touchet

Ugh, Sony are royally pisssing me off now... Wow.... What a pile of stink shit. I'm just gonna quote some stuff from Sony that I found on UK:R and just show exactly why Sony are fucking up. First off, Phil Harrison mocking MS for having multiple models of 360:

"I think we wouldn't take that strategy. We wouldn't create confusion"

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=11209

They've just announced a 40gb and I think this is the 4th SKU if I'm not mistaken?

Now we have him on about how important Backwards Compatability is to the Playstation brand:

"Backwards compatibility, as you know from PlayStation One and PlayStation 2, is a core value of what we believe we should offer. And access to the library of content people have created, bought for themselves, and accumulated over the years is necessary to create a format. PlayStation is a format meaning that it transcends many devices -- PSOne, PS2, and now PS3"

http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=55108

And this POS 40gb doesn't even have SOFTWARE BC. They're just hoping people don't remember what the hell they said and going back on everything. CONFUSION ABOUND.

:lol:

I do hope, though, that as much as we here hate the PS3 (I'm not one of them, though I'm sure as hell think they have gottem themselves stuck in a rut and need to do something to get out of it), that they can get out of this jam, which I think they can do with what they have planned.

The Home thing looks kind of cool, MGS4 and FFXI is coming soon for the PS3 (and the "first system to have it" advantage comes into play there), it's the least expensive Blu-Ray player out (at least from what I've seen), and all SORTS of shockwaves were made about Killzone 2, an app that could really become Sony's ace in the hole (and it looked awesome despite me not getting into those type of games that much). Plus, Sony really delivered announcement wise at E3, though that was some time off.

I'm hoping that Sony can get it right. It's not really a "OMFG we're going to kill a brand" red light just yet. Far from it.

PS3 will be fine. It's off to a slow start, obviously. They were in a shitty posisition, because it was either delay the release until there were games, letting the 360 get a bigger lead, or release it without a lot of games.

There are damn fine looking games coming out though. Uncharted looks badass, and I can't wait for Metal Gear Solid 4 and The new Final Fantasy. LA Noir is sounding like it could be really awesome as well. I'm also waiting on Little Big Planet. Home is going to have some really awesome features too.

There are other games I'm looking forward to, but aren't overly psyched for (New Dynasty Warriors, Persona 4, the new game from the creator of Katamari Damacy)

Plus, I won't lie, I really want to play Haze and Killzone 2.

Yeah, some games may not stay exclusive. Boo hoo, shit happens. But PS3 is getting games, and it is getting exclusives. Just because they don't have a lot of games right now, doesn't mean they won't get them.

Oh, and Tekken 6. Can't forget that.

Or, you know, not bank on an undeveloped technology. That was the major developmental issue that put them in the hole. They were in a shitty position because they made bad decisions.

And I hate to pull a little more reality into things, but honestly, the number of exclusive titles a year later is lackluster, and it's lackluster because developers aren't saying "Well, two years from now..." they're looking at the sales gap, attach rates, etc. And they're developing elsewhere or developing cross-platform.

Which, in turn, will skew sales, which, in turn, will continue to show an effect.

As DP said, it's not like "End of the Line" or anything, but be realistic.

The multi-platform games have also been worse on PS3 than XBox.

Basically, I can see 3 potential "big" audiences that the PS3 is missing out on:

1) The hardcore gamer: Not standing for Sonys lying and knowing that the games so far have been better on the 360.

2) Casual: Wii has taken most of them, but then Madden is better on the 360 as well so if they were looking at a PS3, they're not right now.

3) Kids: Just too expensive for your average parent.

I definatly see the PS3 finishing last in this generation but still do alright, just like the Gamecube did. The only problem for that scenario is that Sony is bleeding money on this thing hoping that game sales and Blu-Ray sales make up for it. If you look at sales figures for the last games in the franchises of FF and MGS, neither of them will save it, the people who make up the most numbers in console and games sales now are the shooting/sports loving guys, just watch the sales charts after Christmas.

As much as I wished they would, FF and MGS are not console sellers anymore :(

I can't speak for multii-platofmr games, due to not having a PS3. I know they're reviewed lower, but reviews tend to be more of a weathervane, blowing in favor of the more popular platform. PS3's exclusives so far have done horrible, too.

It's not just an issue of lying, either. Who wants to wait for promised games down the line?

I know a lot of people are saying "buy both," but it won't happen. American spending power is down. On top of that, Consumer Electronics sales are down. The pricetag on the PS3 is a big factor in this market.

Beyond that, being the cheapest Blu Ray player is hardly a selling point in a primarily low-def market. In August, Blu-Ray/HDDVD sales combined finally managed to topple VHS. A fucking dead format was outselling the two "hot" new formats until August. It might be a selling point down the line, but by then, hi def will be significantly cheaper, and unless they start selling it for like 200 bucks, it'll be moot.

I think MGS and FF are still system sellers, just not the way they used to be.