| Justagamer said:
2 People are balking at TLOU because it's so new, and because we want fresh new experiences on our shiny new consoles. I loved TLOU, and I'll probably buy it again when it comes, but I would have preferred some thing new, not something I just played. 3 You can damage control this all you want, people can balk if they want to, your opinion is not the gospel, even though you would beleive otherwise. Now, do you get it? And I do like you, that's why I just can't stay away. Seriously, your argument here is, they release old movies on blu ray, so that's why it's ok for a fairly new ps3 game to come to the ps4? Wow, that's a strong argument there. |
Ok, I'm glad you're putting in some input now for discussion, so I'll reply appropriately.
1. "No one would balk at a recent DVD release coming to blu ray because that's what they were there for, movies".
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that movie formats are inherently SUPPOSED to have every movie ever made? If so, I'm not so sure it differs from modern gaming. People cry when there's no BC, remakes have been around since GC, and homebrew markets thrive on emulating old games. I'm not saying it's 1:1, and you're saying that new consoles should have new games...look, it's not like ps4 lacks in that respect. It has more new games than x1, and a better starting library than most systems in history. Look, I'm not saying that this should be a standard, but when you're talking about the one game that has earned more goty awards than any other in the last 10 years, add the expansions, upgrade to 1080 and 60fps, well, to me that seems like something ps4 owners might want. Sure, maybe you could call it a cash-grab, but you could also call it filling demand. This is one of the reasons why I used harry potter as the movie. It was a major release that came out on dvd and then shortly after on BR. People expect to be able to watch a movie in HD when they buy BR. Similarly, people now almost expect backwards compatibility....why? Because they expect to be able to play the games they love, or missed opportunities on the new system. There were lots of ps2 games I wanted to play on ps3, but I didn't have bc. I also didn't buy another ps2. I waited for the ports. I missed sotc, ico, gow2, persona4, odin sphere. I play on 3ds too, and I'm always like, "what do you mean I can't play metroid fusion. I would pay 20$ to have that". Because I never owned a gba, and I never will, and this is a demand that Nintendo is missing out on.
2 I agree, I would also like something new, but that doesn't mean there isn't anything new on ps4. There is a huge amount of content on there, and plenty of new games. It's not like they took time out of their schedule to "remaster" the game. It's a port plain and simple. The hardware is capable of running it at a much higher quality. A port can be done by a small team in a very short time, especially given that Sony has engines in place already for cross-gen titles, as does every major developer.
3 But why should people balk? Sony provided massive amounts of content in the end of the ps3's life. They kept pumping out titles non-stop when ms began shifting to kinect and x1. Should they have just saved LoU for ps4? We need to think rationally about this- be business minded...consumer minded. What makes more sense? Save all your development for ps4, or continue to support ps3 and transition into ps4? Should they not release the biggest game of the gen (arguably) on ps4? Objectively, Sony's transition to ps4 is probably close to the very best handling of a launch transition that has ever been.
4. No, close, but no. Not old movies, movies on the cusp of format change. My argument is if you change formats, why wait? If it's ok to release a cross-gen title simultaneously (like titanfall), why is it not ok for the gap to be bigger. Had titanfall been on 360 8 months ago, would it upset people to have it on xb1? I'm not trying to make this a ps vs xb thing, but why is cross-gen and multiple year remastering ok, but continuously putting out strong content and upgrading it for a new platform bad? Again, it's not like this is costing them huge resources to put out. It's a port. Would it have been ok if Sony had told us first- had Sony said it is on ps3 and will be released for ps4 when that comes out. Would it be better if it was 8 months ago? 6? 4? How does one guage a timeline on this? Why is it ok for some cross-gen titles (like titanfall) but not for others. I'm not trying to start an argument here, but let's put some science into this. 6 months is ok, 10 is not, announcing at release the intentions is ok, surprise porting is not. Having 10 games already is ok, 8 games is not. Movies, books, television, music is ok, games are not.
We may be able to figure out numbers, or we may not be able to agree on them. One thing I've learned though, it that when the difference between right and wrong comes down to a debate about where the goalposts are, at least one side is trying to score a touchdown.
In closing, you want to know an example of a company that instead of releasing on the platform available, waited for the new one? Square-enix did with ff13. It was originally a ps2 game.
