By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Abun on 14 October 2015
Edit Thread
zero129 said:
Abun said:
zero129 said:

Yes cos of the design of the systems with PS2+3 made them super hard to develope for and that was for a reason. To make the systems last longer.

It payed off with the PS2 since it become such a massive success thanks to coming off the back of the PS1 and Sonys great marketing but in a way it bited Sony or should i say Kaz in the ass with the PS3 even his comment here" "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai. LINK: http://www.cnet.com/news/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/ " shows that they made it hard for a reason.

and i know Sony would of continued that trend with the PS4 if it wasnt for the 360 being such a success and gaining so many developers thanks to its ease compared to the PS3.

You don't have any idea what you are talking about and try to come off as you sre speaking facts when you are dead wrong lol.I played several PC games on the PSX and that is a fact that it started the trend of PC devs putting their games on consoles.youc an not disporve that and the argument was aout PC games,bit FPS only in which the N64 popularized on consoles and offline co-op paved the way for online gaming on consoles.

I think your a bit mixed up here or what im saying is going over your head.

Also it seems to me like your the one speaking facts when your wrong on a number of things..

Where did i say that no PC game ever came to a Sony platform?? they did, but they never became console sellers like they are today and in most cases didnt even resemble the games they came from Call of Duty made by a console developer on consoles and not the original dev. With GTA Rockstar imo has always been more of a console developer and im pretty sure GTA was never a once PC exclusive. Baldures Gate on PS2 was nothing like its PC version and the list goes on.

But like i said i never said that no PC ports ever came to a Sony Console. I said Sony made it harder on PC devs with the PS2 and PS3 where as MS paved the way by making it super easy on them.

Also your stating your opinion as facts when you say "Not as good is laughable,because they were better but they did not have the impact because Sony did not need them to sell their console"

If them other FPS games that your talking about was as good as Halo is on consoles imo they would still be around and still be big today.

Also even if Sony didnt need them (So then Sony only needed FPS after they seen how big they where thanks to MS with Halo?? is this what your saying??)their publishers and devs needed to sell them!. Kinda the same way Call of Duty didnt need Sony or MS to become huge they needed a good game MW1.

Also if them other FPS games your talking about was better they would of had higher ratings and sold better then Halo did since they had a much larger install base. But like i said its all down to opinions its just that my opinion seems to go along with a much larger precentage then the one your stating as fact..

Also i credit Goldeneye with being what made FPS work on consoles and Halo worked on that to improve it with Halo 2 making Online FPS on consoles huge unless this is something you want to denie too?.

As usual you are full of contradcitons.Those other FPS did not sell better or get better ratings because the PS2 had better games to offer while the Xbox only had Halo which got hyped because the Xbox needed it for survival.See my point now?Nothing you said went over my head and I just pointed out how off you were with claiming that the Xbox is responsible for FPS being popular or bringing PC games/devs to consoles.Both are wrong and you have not rebuttal for my facts.