How will the PS3 fare against the Xbox 360's Halo 3 release?

[cerebrex]

Anyone as bent as you at demanding respect from anyone, let alone anonymous people over the net, has serious serious issues. How tall are you? Short man syndrome maybe? How much do you make? Small penis?

Seriously, we all know one of those people, always talking about how everyone needs to respect them for some unknown reason. They always turn out to be the biggest douche bags.

Sigh, as for the personal attacks... I'm quite tall, make plenty, and my wife is quite pleased - I appreciate the concern - way to stay on task. It's simply an issue of combating ignorance and bias on the forum - I just reached my breaking point.

It would seem that when the consensus of the conversation leaned away from the PS3, we started getting a lot of the fanboys rather militant - that needs to be avoided.

 

[DaRat]

And Bluray has nothing whatsoever to do with how many polygons the system can render at once. Nice non-sequitor though

But it has everything to do with the amount of textures and environments games can hold.

Who cares how many polygons are rendered if there isn't enough space on the medium to hold all of the textures and things for these HD games? Multiple DVDs is an option but won't be for some of the bigger and better games as they come out.

All I know is 8 gigs wasn't enough for HD movies, how the hell do people think it will be enough for fresh and new HD games.

 

[Stereophile]

I just reached my breaking point.

Oh boo hoo. Start a flame bait thread, and you can't take the heat. Get out of the kitchen.

I might not have a compsci degree, but like sixthsense said, the fact remains GT5 runs at 1080P 60FPS, PGR 4 runs at 720P, 30FPS.
The PS3 is in fact displaying 4.5 times as many pixels per second. That's fill rate right ? Clearly Polyphony is getting the PS3 to perform better than what bizarre got out of the X360 for PGR4.
You clearly stepped past your knowledge when you said 200k polys a car is ridiculous. It's an absurd argument. Obviously they don't think 200k is ridiculous. I doubt they could get the results they want with 20k or whatever your game uses.

It's funny to hear some alleged X360 dev critique Polyphony's car poly budget in this thread. No wait, pathetic is more like it. I think I'll defer to Polyphony's judgement, rather than some random person on the internet.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

But it has everything to do with the amount of textures and environments games can hold.

Who cares how many polygons are rendered if there isn't enough space on the medium to hold all of the textures and things for these HD games? Multiple DVDs is an option but won't be for some of the bigger and better games as they come out.

All I know is 8 gigs wasn't enough for HD movies, how the hell do people think it will be enough for fresh and new HD games.

movies need more space than games do. Also, it's worth noting that a 720P movie in H.264 @ 90minutes long will fit into the 8.5GB space of a DVD-9.

Multi disk will be an option for ANY game that comes out, it's silly to think that the 25GB of Bluray is a *requirement* for HD games. Where Microsoft went stupid with 360 was introducing a hard driveless model *period*, not with going DVD9. By assuming you need more than dvd-9 for textures, you neglect the fact that we have fantastic compression technology.

 

[Timbowens]

Sigh, as for the personal attacks... I'm quite tall, make plenty, and my wife is quite pleased - I appreciate the concern - way to stay on task. It's simply an issue of combating ignorance and bias on the forum - I just reached my breaking point.

It would seem that when the consensus of the conversation leaned away from the PS3, we started getting a lot of the fanboys rather militant - that needs to be avoided.

Fair enough.

 

[cerebrex]

Oh boo hoo. Start a flame bait thread, and you can't take the heat. Get out of the kitchen.

I might not have a compsci degree, but like sixthsense said, the fact remains GT5 runs at 1080P 60FPS, PGR 4 runs at 720P, 30FPS.
The PS3 is in fact displaying 4.5 times as many pixels per second. That's fill rate right ? Clearly Polyphony is getting the PS3 to perform better than what bizarre got out of the X360 for PGR4.
You clearly stepped past your knowledge when you said 200k polys a car is ridiculous. It's an absurd argument. Obviously they don't think 200k is ridiculous. I doubt they could get the results they want with 20k or whatever your game uses.

It's funny to hear some alleged X360 dev critique Polyphony's car poly budget in this thread. No wait, pathetic is more like it. I think I'll defer to Polyphony's judgement, rather than some random person on the internet.

I didn't even read this.. you're oblivious to the fact PGR uses anti-aliasing and loads more high pass shaders while GT5 will not, and how the PGR team concentrates on environments whereas Polyphony does not, it's all resource management and allocation - but you wouldn't understand that - you only see that 200 is bigger than 100 so it must be better. Your own ignorance displayed in this thread is the best evidence to discredit you, you're narrow minded and uneducated - and you don't realize it. If you would be so kind, stop blathering all of the same stats that you found from some 12 year old kid on a PS3 fanboy forum, you really do not understand enough about what you're talking about to maintain any sort of intelligent dialog, you must understand it before you can realize you're wrong. If it will assist you in doing so, I apologize.. clearly your ability to google far exceeds my years of experience in the industry.

 

[cerebrex]

But it has everything to do with the amount of textures and environments games can hold.

Who cares how many polygons are rendered if there isn't enough space on the medium to hold all of the textures and things for these HD games? Multiple DVDs is an option but won't be for some of the bigger and better games as they come out.

All I know is 8 gigs wasn't enough for HD movies, how the hell do people think it will be enough for fresh and new HD games.

Until consoles have enough texture memory, the size of the disc means nothing for texture sizes. It certainly allows for a larger variety of textures and longer games with more content - but it won't happen - developers know that having a longer game does not increase it's sales figures - the screenshots and reviews do. If you can make a great game with half the resources, it is far superior than an amazing game with twice the resources - the money you invested to produce the longer title equalizes or falls short of the money saved by making the great game with half the resources. It's just business.
The advantage you will see directly from the larger space will be less decompressing of game files - faster load times. But, until consoles really start bumping up their bandwidths even that will only be a minimal gain. Using blu ray will have almost no advantages for us gamers at the current time. But, it opens the door for future consoles to utilize. It's time the manufacturers stop bottlenecking their consoles - they do not have the limitations or incompatibilities to worry about that PC gamers do. The opportunity is huge for the future of consoles - which much to my dismay will almost certainly mean the demise of PC gaming - but until they take those steps to surpass the shortcomings of hardware variety that PC's deal with, you can rest assured PC gaming will be around for some time.

 

[rainbowbrite]

that's what a forum like this is for, don't fear the exchange of ideas.

Jesus Christ... Then why the hell are you discussing it again? You have added nothing new to the flame war, but thanks for adding another worthless thread.

Come back in 5 years when all consoles have set down their roots in this gaming generation and have their fan base has been fleshed out. Because now, all that's going to happen is the same worthless opinions followed by someone else's worthless opinion about a battle that has only just started.

I believe you should heed your own advice and take some criticism or re-read Setan's post

 

[cerebrex]

I believe you should heed your own advice and take some criticism or re-read Setan's post

When a person is incapable of exchanging information and becomes ignorant and intentionally circumvents the conversation the disrespects others they have no business in this thread. Yes, I have an unbelievable prejudice towards people that try and make every console discussion into an argument.

 

[qbert3]

8minutes into my first time playing Halo 3, my 360 dies out on me. I've had it for a year now. GG 360, my PS3 is still running.

 

[swatX]

8minutes into my first time playing Halo 3, my 360 dies out on me. I've had it for a year now. GG 360, my PS3 is still running.

I bet you are still going to keep the 360 because it is still awesome no matter how you put it.

 

[cerebrex]

8minutes into my first time playing Halo 3, my 360 dies out on me. I've had it for a year now. GG 360, my PS3 is still running.

haha damn dude, now that is bad luck. you should look into the newer builds with the 65nm cores - people are reporting them to be very stable.

 

[Crighton]

so can someone please explain to me how the PS3's existence is somehow threatened by a game for a different system? That is what this thread is about right? Not the continual pissing contest between the 2 systems. I personally don't like Halo as a game. I have only played Halo one ,but it left me flat. I prefer to play other FPS games over Halo because I am the rare type of person who doesn't care for online FPS free for alls. Maybe because I suck at them but I prefer the single player story lines and like those games much better. The console I own is a PS3 and since I don't and won't own a 360 I don't really pay much attention to the titles I cannot play. I think the major offense to the PS3 in my eyes is the policy of making Crappy Ports for multi platform games. I pay more attention to that since I don't like to find out that the game I am playing would have been better on a different system. I have herd many times over and over that the PS3 will catch up and Blah Blah Blah. I don't care anymore. I am demanding better games on the PS3 now. the system has been out 9 months now and that means developers have had it for much longer than that. The stupid excuse for the small amount of dev time expended on the PS3 compared to the 360 has always been small user base. this is sad considering that the PS3 while not setting record numbers is now about to hit the 5 million mark. The 360 is over 12 or something but the market has much more competition with good games to deal with. If they put out a great game on the PS3 in this market STARVING for great games they could realistically sell to a very high percentage of PS3 owners out there. Think of it this way how many people who own the PS3 also own Resistance? that game was very good but not by any means Great. I don't think 5 million consoles is really something to be dismissed easily. Also look at the Holiday season coming up and how many 360 owners may now be tempted to purchase a PS3 with the rumored $400 PS3 supposed to be out on the 28th of this month. That user base could grow somewhat significantly over the next few months.


But back on topic. I think the people who want a PS3 will still want a PS3 because it is nothing new to them to find out that they cannot play Halo on a PS3. It was alway known to be an Exclusive Xbox/PC product.

 

[Defective]

tempted to purchase a PS3 with the rumored $400 PS3 supposed to be out on the 28th of this month. That user base could grow somewhat significantly over the next few months.

The ugly rumor is though that the new $400 version will not have backwards compatability, will have less USB ports and no card readers.

I thought the upscaling of PS2 games was one of the system's attractive features. Strip BC altogether and I think you take away a selling point for some. If true, it does tell you what they did to be able to make the $400 price point.

 

[qbert3]

im definitely getting it replaced. im hoping they cant fix it and they send me a sweet hdmi version or something.

 

[Netrat33]

Uh, no, MGS2 launched about a YEAR after the PS2 came out. I remember because I had jack shit worth playing until MGS2 came out, forever cementing the idea in my head that getting launch hardware is almost never, ever worth your trouble and expense. Plus, of course, the piece of crap died 3 times in the first 90 days, LOL.

I know that. That's why i said "practically" The first year of PS2 didn't have the 120 million units sold. That first year it helped push systems much like Gears did.

 

[Troub]

(Wii intentionally removed from this discussion)

Sure, it's been discussed... pre-orders for Halo3 are outrageous, the marketing is outrageous... but... from what I've seen and read.. it lives up to the hype. This only means more 360 gamers out there. Sony is again going to drop the price of the PS3... but will it's bluray save it? The Xbox 360 has already sold more than twice as many consoles, and it seems it's exclusive franchises are picking up more and more steam. Sony has some big releases due out shortly to answer Microsoft's flagship. I'm a fan of both consoles.. but I'm concerned that Sony made a mistake letting the 360 sit as the sole next gen console for such a long time before the PS3 was released. The PS3 release was hyped, marketed, and very exciting. Sony fanboys were predicting a catastrophic annihilation of the 360... but I just haven't seen that... and it seems the table is turning back in favor of the 360 again. Sure, hype fades off eventually, but is that all that has fueled the PS3 to now? Who is really delivering the content here between the consoles?

By lowering the price to $399 in a few weeks!

 

[Wondernerd]

The ugly rumor is though that the new $400 version will not have backwards compatability, will have less USB ports and no card readers.

I thought the upscaling of PS2 games was one of the system's attractive features. Strip BC altogether and I think you take away a selling point for some. If true, it does tell you what they did to be able to make the $400 price point.

I'm looking at what I do know:

-I just passed through Amsterdam and France and saw fuckloads of advertisements for the PS2. Which I found odd. Even if the PS3 wasn't for sale(It was), they should be pushing the new toy they are selling soon.

-The PS3 doesn't have any games. Every person I know that personally has one either plays PS2 games on it or Uses it as a Blu-Ray player. Even the promising Hyped games like Lair suck ass.

-After slagging Microsoft for being last generation for using Rumble, Sony's brand new controller features Rumble, but it is somehow a better more enhanced Next Generation Rumble.

-A false price cut to move stock.

-A lower featured version with a lower price.

-PS3 is selling slower then the Gamecube.



I don't see any changes coming. Maybe a 400 dollar PS3 would move units, But I doubt it. You can get a Wii or a 360 for less. I can't see how Halo can hurt the PS3 any more then it is.

 

[Psychotext]

-After slagging Microsoft for being last generation for using Rumble, Sony's brand new controller features Rumble, but it is somehow a better more enhanced Next Generation Rumble.

All signs point to the new controllers using old fashioned rumble. Immersion have come out and said that Sony aren't using touchsense.

 

[cerebrex]

so can someone please explain to me how the PS3's existence is somehow threatened by a game for a different system? That is what this thread is about right? Not the continual pissing contest between the 2 systems. I personally don't like Halo as a game. I have only played Halo one ,but it left me flat. I prefer to play other FPS games over Halo because I am the rare type of person who doesn't care for online FPS free for alls. Maybe because I suck at them but I prefer the single player story lines and like those games much better. The console I own is a PS3 and since I don't and won't own a 360 I don't really pay much attention to the titles I cannot play. I think the major offense to the PS3 in my eyes is the policy of making Crappy Ports for multi platform games. I pay more attention to that since I don't like to find out that the game I am playing would have been better on a different system. I have herd many times over and over that the PS3 will catch up and Blah Blah Blah. I don't care anymore. I am demanding better games on the PS3 now. the system has been out 9 months now and that means developers have had it for much longer than that. The stupid excuse for the small amount of dev time expended on the PS3 compared to the 360 has always been small user base. this is sad considering that the PS3 while not setting record numbers is now about to hit the 5 million mark. The 360 is over 12 or something but the market has much more competition with good games to deal with. If they put out a great game on the PS3 in this market STARVING for great games they could realistically sell to a very high percentage of PS3 owners out there. Think of it this way how many people who own the PS3 also own Resistance? that game was very good but not by any means Great. I don't think 5 million consoles is really something to be dismissed easily. Also look at the Holiday season coming up and how many 360 owners may now be tempted to purchase a PS3 with the rumored $400 PS3 supposed to be out on the 28th of this month. That user base could grow somewhat significantly over the next few months.


But back on topic. I think the people who want a PS3 will still want a PS3 because it is nothing new to them to find out that they cannot play Halo on a PS3. It was alway known to be an Exclusive Xbox/PC product.

Crighton - good post there but it's also kind of contradicting. You start off by saying how could the PS3 be threatened by a game for another console. Then you have some good insights about the PS3 where you mention the game selection sucks and people are starving for good titles. Well, you pretty much just defined why it is a threat - the other console offers more games. You said you don't own an X360, and you'll never own one ... well with that kind of mindset, you might not be able to see why the X360 is a threat - since you won't ever switch regardless of your distaste for the lack of titles, it might be difficult to see the reason why some people do. The PS3 will be dropping it's price even further - but microsoft will also be dropping their console even further than that - so the question is, spend less money and get more titles, or spend more money and get less titles (and bluray).

 

[cerebrex]

I'm looking at what I do know:

-I just passed through Amsterdam and France and saw fuckloads of advertisements for the PS2. Which I found odd. Even if the PS3 wasn't for sale(It was), they should be pushing the new toy they are selling soon.

-The PS3 doesn't have any games. Every person I know that personally has one either plays PS2 games on it or Uses it as a Blu-Ray player. Even the promising Hyped games like Lair suck ass.

-After slagging Microsoft for being last generation for using Rumble, Sony's brand new controller features Rumble, but it is somehow a better more enhanced Next Generation Rumble.

-A false price cut to move stock.

-A lower featured version with a lower price.

-PS3 is selling slower then the Gamecube.



I don't see any changes coming. Maybe a 400 dollar PS3 would move units, But I doubt it. You can get a Wii or a 360 for less. I can't see how Halo can hurt the PS3 any more then it is.

All great points. I really didn't expect the PS3 to have as much trouble as it did, but then again, I didn't expect it to start out at $600.00. I like mine, I love the bluray - but like i've mentioned before all the people that bought the unit as a blu-ray player (which is probably pretty substancial) can not be directly compared to average gamers - they won't purchase as many games (if any) and probably will do more damage to Sony than anything.

 

[Xrave]

The ugly rumor is though that the new $400 version will not have backwards compatability, will have less USB ports and no card readers.

I thought the upscaling of PS2 games was one of the system's attractive features. Strip BC altogether and I think you take away a selling point for some. If true, it does tell you what they did to be able to make the $400 price point.

Although the 40GB version isn't out yet, they're probably talking about the EE chip won't be included for hardware backwards compatibility, but it will have software backwards compatibility.

 

[Crighton]

Crighton - good post there but it's also kind of contradicting. You start off by saying how could the PS3 be threatened by a game for another console. Then you have some good insights about the PS3 where you mention the game selection sucks and people are starving for good titles. Well, you pretty much just defined why it is a threat - the other console offers more games. You said you don't own an X360, and you'll never own one ... well with that kind of mindset, you might not be able to see why the X360 is a threat - since you won't ever switch regardless of your distaste for the lack of titles, it might be difficult to see the reason why some people do. The PS3 will be dropping it's price even further - but microsoft will also be dropping their console even further than that - so the question is, spend less money and get more titles, or spend more money and get less titles (and bluray).

Thank you for you compliment and I do see what you are saying about titles. This wasn't my point though. What I was trying to say was simple. People who want the PS3 already know that Halo is not in their future unless they want to purchase both systems. When I said I would never own a 360 was not meant to dig at the value of a system that has preformed well. It was actually a statement of my inability to purchase more than one system when considering my finances. At the time of purchase the Games were not my main concern. Every System has gotten games eventually. I didn't think I would be waiting this long and then every time I hear about a "Great" game about to come out it is either delayed or inferior to the product that has been put out for the 360. I made my purchase based on the features that I was getting at the time. Base System plus HD Movie Player plus Wireless Adapter built in was $600 for Sony's offering while it was $700 for MicroSofts offering. As a bonus I received backwards compatibility for the larger portion of my old games as well as a card reader and an aesthetic look and all in one unit which all pleased me. These bonuses were not deal breakers but they were a nudge in one direction for me. One more thing that was a major factor was the HDMI port. This was a huge factor since I wanted the best quality video output to my new HDTV. These may not be important to you but it was why I made my choice. I don't regret it in any way. It preforms very well and reliable and does exactly what I wanted it to do at the time of purchase. I do want more games but they are coming out. I do take a slight offence to the constant diatribe about Sony having " NO " Games. this is untrue it is just the fact that the games that they share with the 360 are just poor knock offs that bothers me. The games are there and I have played quite a few games with my GameFly membership. As for games worth the price of purchase there are few of them but I do own a bunch.

I hope that clears up my views a little for you .

 

[Defective]

Although the 40GB version isn't out yet, they're probably talking about the EE chip won't be included for hardware backwards compatibility, but it will have software backwards compatibility.

No, supposedly BC will be removed all together. There are other chips other than the EE chip on the board that allow BC to be there. Again, it is only a rumor, so keep salt on hand.

 

[The18thLetter]

The ugly rumor is though that the new $400 version will not have backwards compatability, will have less USB ports and no card readers.

I thought the upscaling of PS2 games was one of the system's attractive features. Strip BC altogether and I think you take away a selling point for some. If true, it does tell you what they did to be able to make the $400 price point.

Sigh. The difference in the new models is that they no longer have the Emotion Engine built-into the PS3... therefore there is no more HARDWARE emulation.

However, SOFTWARE emulation is still available in every PS3, even the EE-less ones. It's significantly better than the software emulation available in the 360 (i.e. 90% of the PS1/PS2 library works flawlessly), and there's regular updates to it to add more compatible titles.

All these "issues" are non-issues. The $399 PS3 is a bargain, and anyone that doesn't have one yet would be dumb to not pick one up now, especially with the plethora of great games coming out starting October 9th (Folklore).

 

[Xrave]

No, supposedly BC will be removed all together. There are other chips other than the EE chip on the board that allow BC to be there. Again, it is only a rumor, so keep salt on hand.

That rumor doesn't even make sense. Not even Sony would be stupid enough to take away a selling point of the PS3 by removing all backwards compatibility.

 

[Psychotext]

Sigh. The difference in the new models is that they no longer have the Emotion Engine built-into the PS3... therefore there is no more HARDWARE emulation.

However, SOFTWARE emulation is still available in every PS3, even the EE-less ones. It's significantly better than the software emulation available in the 360 (i.e. 90% of the PS1/PS2 library works flawlessly), and there's regular updates to it to add more compatible titles.

Incorrect.

Whilst the 80gb machine removed the EE+GS chip they put the individual GS chip in there. This is not 100% software emulation. Current information points to the removal of the GS chip in the 40gb version - thus no backwards compatibility.

 

[phide]

But it has everything to do with the amount of textures and environments games can hold.

Both the X360 and the PS3 have a very finite amount of memory. Yes, you can fit 20 gigs of texture data on that Blu-ray, and the game can use every one of those individual assets, but can only use a very small portion of that at one time. Without very complex streaming systems, developers are quite limited in the amount of data they can cover geometry with.

More textures: yes. Higher resolution textures: no, not typically. At this point, most of what we've seen from cross-platform titles is that the X360 variant typically receives the higher resolution assets.

The $399 PS3 is a bargain, and anyone that doesn't have one yet would be dumb to not pick one up now, especially with the plethora of great games coming out starting October 9th (Folklore).

I disagree. I frankly have very little interest in many of the titles on the PS3, and even with a Blu-ray drive, I don't find the $399 price point all that alluring.

I'm not a big console guy by nature, but both the Wii and the X360 interest me enough to occasionally consider buying either or both. I'm not sure if I've ever seriously considered, or even really thought about considering, the PS3. Even at $399, it still just isn't doing it for me.

 

[Crighton]

I'm looking at what I do know:

-I just passed through Amsterdam and France and saw fuckloads of advertisements for the PS2. Which I found odd. Even if the PS3 wasn't for sale(It was), they should be pushing the new toy they are selling soon.

-The PS3 doesn't have any games. Every person I know that personally has one either plays PS2 games on it or Uses it as a Blu-Ray player. Even the promising Hyped games like Lair suck ass.

-After slagging Microsoft for being last generation for using Rumble, Sony's brand new controller features Rumble, but it is somehow a better more enhanced Next Generation Rumble.

-A false price cut to move stock.

-A lower featured version with a lower price.

-PS3 is selling slower then the Gamecube.



I don't see any changes coming. Maybe a 400 dollar PS3 would move units, But I doubt it. You can get a Wii or a 360 for less. I can't see how Halo can hurt the PS3 any more then it is.

I have to disagree with what you "know" on a point for point basis.

On your point about advertising for the PS2 in Amsterdam. I have no idea what sells in Amsterdam but I am willing to say that Sony may have a better idea of what is more feasible in that country due to market research and such. I don't see how it really matters since Sony is making money on each PS2 sold and they are loosing on each PS3. They are also still supporting both generations of console so why not promote the one that will sell the best in a specific area?

PS3 Does have games. There are not as many as the 360 but they both share a lot of those games. I admit that there is a decent portion of people who use the PS3 as a blueray player but isn't that just one more reason to purchase a PS3? As for backward computability that is also a bonus feature not a bad thing. It let's you play your old games at an Unconverted resolution so they look better on the HDTVs that people use the PS3 on.

Rumble was not an option that was available to Sony at launch time since they were being sued for it's use. They saw the 6-Axis as a more dynamic way of controlling your games without the added confusion of extra buttons. They then came up with a marketing Spin on Rumble. Players in almost complete unison demanded rumble so Sony went and settled the law suit and made this function available for it's customers. They never once back tracked and said that they agreed with it's customer's views of rumble they said that they were being responsive to those customers which once again is a GOOD THING.

There actually was a price cut that some people want to spin into some type of delusional conspiracy. Simple point of fact. The piece of equipment you could purchase for $600 is now $500. Do not bring the word Sku up since most people here using it do not use it in the proper use of the word. What most mean by Sku is price point and this is also just marketing strategy and not fact.

A lowered featured version for a lowered price is what Microsoft has always offered. This is a GOOD THING. Most people here complained that the PS3 has too many features and that is what made the price so high. Now they complain that they are not getting all the features they said were not needed before.

The PS3 is selling worse than apples as well. what is the point of this comparison? Are they the same in anything besides both in the realm of consoles. I have no idea what the relative price for each system in in comparison to inflation but does it matter in any way who or what sells better at this point? Once there are a certain number of consoles sold then there is a viable user base to mitigate the cost of game development. Most companies don't think any one system is worth ignoring so most of the currant crop of games are going Multi-Platform. This means games for all. also a GOOD THING. I just wish that the quality of those games were equal.

 

[Netrat33]

That rumor doesn't even make sense. Not even Sony would be stupid enough to take away a selling point of the PS3 by removing all backwards compatibility.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/skubar/retailers-listing-40gb-ps3-backward-compatability-nixed-306294.php

 

[Xrave]

I can't get on Kotaku at work but I'm assuming they're reporting all backwards compatibility is missing...which is really dissapointing from Sony's perspective since they always used that feature as a buying point.

Rumble was not an option that was available to Sony at launch time since they were being sued for it's use. They saw the 6-Axis as a more dynamic way of controlling your games without the added confusion of extra buttons. They then came up with a marketing Spin on Rumble. Players in almost complete unison demanded rumble so Sony went and settled the law suit and made this function available for it's customers. They never once back tracked and said that they agreed with it's customer's views of rumble they said that they were being responsive to those customers which once again is a GOOD THING.

Sony originally stated that they thought rumble was pointless and that they had no plans to ever include it on the controllers. The point that many had issues with is that due to this statement people went and bought all their normal Six-Axis controllers because they thought they wouldn't be missing out on other rumble edditions. Then after the lawsuit was settled they backtracked and pulled a, "Well due to popular demand, here you go! Buy more controllers from us!"

I personally don't get a shit about rumble...I don't even notice it missing and I don't plan on replacing my current controllers, but they did backtrack on the whole rumble concept.

 

[Crighton]

but they did backtrack on the whole rumble concept.

No they didn't backtrack. Please reread your statement and see the difference in what they said. Compared to what you think they are saying. They said that they are bringing it back due to popular demand. They never said they did not think it was " Last Generation" tech. They also never said " Never ". The Official and Original statements were stated that it was not needed and the Company is only now bringing it out "Due to Popular Demand." I.E. People complained enough that they had to introduce it and it is now feasible to do so because they can generate enough money to pay for both the Law Suit and the Royalties that are now due.

 

[Defective]

They never said they did not think it was " Last Generation" tech.

"I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function -- not from us but from third parties."

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=15342

 

[deception``]

No they didn't backtrack. Please reread your statement and see the difference in what they said. Compared to what you think they are saying. They said that they are bringing it back due to popular demand. They never said they did not think it was " Last Generation" tech. They also never said " Never ". The Official and Original statements were stated that it was not needed and the Company is only now bringing it out "Due to Popular Demand." I.E. People complained enough that they had to introduce it and it is now feasible to do so because they can generate enough money to pay for both the Law Suit and the Royalties that are now due.

Please do some research:

BIZ: A lot of gamers, including myself, enjoy the controller's motion sensing at times, but we still miss rumble. If gamers want it and are vocal enough, will Sony reintroduce the force feedback at some point?

Phil Harrison: We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties.

Source

As Xrave stated they dismissed rumble as an uncessary feature, only to bring it back at a later date. Smart marketing indeed.

 

[Defective]

Please do some research:



Source

As Xrave stated they dismissed rumble as an uncessary feature, only to bring it back at a later date. Smart marketing indeed.

Hah! Beat you by a minute!

 

[Xrave]

No they didn't backtrack.

Sorry, you are right that they never did say "we'll never release it," but they did say that they had no plans to make a rumble feature and that it would have to be 3rd party support on specific game controllers.

And yea...they did make the last generation comment

Edit: I also think that had the lawsuit not been there, rumble would have been included on day-1 release of the PS3. Why would you not release an extra feature like that? Just make it so you can turn it off if you don't like it or want longer battery life.

However that's just conjecture and if true, Sony sure did a nice spin on it with the "popular demand!" press release. Eitherway it was win/win for Sony. They settle the lawsuit, already have a profit from selling normal controllers, then get more profit from selling the rumble editions!

I still like my non-rumble controllers so it doesn't affect me!

 

[Defective]

I still like my non-rumble controllers so it doesn't affect me!

I missed it the moment I played a PS2 game on the PS3 that used rumble. Then it bothered me.

 

[stevedave]

Sony is fucking stupid for re-releasing the rumble it's going to make the controller heavier and I don't like rumble they should work on the copying the Wii mote better with their sisaxx so games like Lair don't suck ass because of controls.

Also it may seem imposable but there probably will be a day when we see PS3 sales higher than Xbox360 and maybe even the Wii. A large price drop with the release of two or three big tittles will do it easy. Just look what Crisis core and the slim psp did in Japan.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...x?guid={6395C52A-339E-4B57-B927-0FF66529C2E3}

PSP is killing the DS right now in Japan and it probably will do the same in the US when Crisis core is released. It doesn’t take much to turn the tides.

 

[jester1176]

methinks they should have shelled out the cash in the first place.

one of the few times it's easier to ask for permission than beg for forgiveness is when there's a lawsuit at stake.

 

[cerebrex]

Sony is fucking stupid for re-releasing the rumble it's going to make the controller heavier and I don't like rumble they should work on the copying the Wii mote better with their sisaxx so games like Lair don't suck ass because of controls.

Also it may seem imposable but there probably will be a day when we see PS3 sales higher than Xbox360 and maybe even the Wii. A large price drop with the release of two or three big tittles will do it easy. Just look what Crisis core and the slim psp did in Japan.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...x?guid={6395C52A-339E-4B57-B927-0FF66529C2E3}

PSP is killing the DS right now in Japan and it probably will do the same in the US when Crisis core is released. It doesn’t take much to turn the tides.

The Japanese market is almost incomparible to the US market with consoles. From my knowledge the PS3 far outsells the Xbox in Japan for instance. In the US the DS is annihilating the PSP. As for June '07 the split appears to be 25.39 PSP and 70.96DS/DSL - and suprisingly the PSP is not outselling the DS in Japan - current to March '07. But I think you might mean the PSP has recently overtaken them - but that would be a long shot seeing as how the Japan sales figures were 29.46 DS to 6.92 PSP (million)