By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why did PS3 owners accept lazy ports?

Tagged games:

CosmicSex on 21 October 2014
celador said:
Wii U owners boycotted lazy ports and now they have practically no support from third parties


This.



Around the Network
CosmicSex on 21 October 2014

I remember seeing an alliance on VGC where Wii U owners were committed to supporting 3rd pary games. The logical conclusion is that no one is going to support you if you don't support them. Have we forgotten about this already?



CDiablo on 21 October 2014
The_Sony_Girl1 said:

Many ports such as Bayonetta were lazy ports. Why did PS3 owners still buy them? Look at Wii U owners. They knew their systems could do more, and boycotted lazy ports. Not PS3 owners. There were lazy ports of games that actually outsold the usually superior Xbox 360 games. Why didn't PS3 owners boycott lazy ports like Wii U owners.


Wii U owners "boycotted" it on the U. They still bought the non gimped versions on PS360. Many PS3 owners at the time did not have 360 while most U users have a PC/PS360 to play better versions of those games. If Wii U was on spec with the PS4/X1 and got gimped versions of a current gen only game(the only that currently exists is Shadow of Moridor) You would see much better sales(in relativity to install base.)



Getting an XBOX One for me is like being in a bad relationship but staying together because we have kids. XBone we have 20000+ achievement points, 2+ years of XBL Gold and 20000+ MS points. I think its best we stay together if only for the MS points.

Nintendo Treehouse is what happens when a publisher is confident and proud of its games and doesn't need to show CGI lies for five minutes.

-Jim Sterling

fps_d0minat0r on 21 October 2014

Because against popular belief, playstation owners dont base their game purchases solely on resolution and frame-rate.



GameAnalyser on 21 October 2014

Even to this date I get claerly reminded of that Ubisoft's Splinter Cell double agent lazy port which angered me beyond limits and hanged my newly bought PS3.



Around the Network
KLXVER on 21 October 2014
fps_d0minat0r said:
Because against popular belief, playstation owners dont base their game purchases solely on resolution and frame-rate.


Tell that to the AC Unity developers...



mornelithe on 21 October 2014
CosmicSex said:
celador said:
Wii U owners boycotted lazy ports and now they have practically no support from third parties


This.

I boycotted every MP game that was worse than it's other counterpart.  But, I had a gaming rig at the time, so the choice was rather easy.



fps_d0minat0r on 21 October 2014
KLXVER said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
Because against popular belief, playstation owners dont base their game purchases solely on resolution and frame-rate.


Tell that to the AC Unity developers...


I'm sure they already know and have maybe even already predicted higher sales on the PS systems.



oniyide on 21 October 2014
JazzB1987 said:
celador said:
Wii U owners boycotted lazy ports and now they have practically no support from third parties


Because other people accept bad ports.


If you let devs do what they want of course you do get bad ports.  Everyone should have boycotted them so they would not dare to offer crap again.

Humans are lazy and not really smart (they do what others do and what is IN at the moment.) this has nothing to do with a fanbase its humans in general. This is also why we get broken games or day1 DLC and all the other crap noone actually likes. As long as people support shit  shit will happen.

Its in every part of our life even in politics. A country would lose every big company or rich people when rich people would be taxed the same way normal people are (fair taxes.The more you own the more taxes you pay) If for example Germany would start to make rich people pay more taxes then those would leave Germany and move to England or whatever. If the whole EU would do that rich people and companies would move to the US or whatever.  As long as not everyone is doing the same the result will always be "FUCK YOU I MOVE ON THEN"  People need to act in concert.

another example is this:
Why do you think a person called WORKER working in job X gets payed that bad? Because he is replaceable. Other people will work for low wages so the result is our friend WORKER gets paid that shitty. If everyone would say "thats not enough I wont work for that little money" everyone would earn more money. But people dont care for quality value fairness or whatever or they are just weak personalities.

So in your example not boycotting the games resulted in WiiU having no third party   it was other people accepting bad ports that showed the third party "see this is how I can make easy money. No effort needed here".

Spiltcoke said:
Him what do you mean? What choice did ps3 gamers have. Was either accept it or not play the games.

Easy choice IMO  there is better stuff out there


so i have to NOT play a game i want to play becasue you feeling salty? LMAO naw



torok on 21 October 2014
The_Sony_Girl1 said:

Many ports such as Bayonetta were lazy ports. Why did PS3 owners still buy them? Look at Wii U owners. They knew their systems could do more, and boycotted lazy ports. Not PS3 owners. There were lazy ports of games that actually outsold the usually superior Xbox 360 games. Why didn't PS3 owners boycott lazy ports like Wii U owners.


Nobody boycotted games on the Wii U. That games wouldn't sell there.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.