the only downside to this is that we might end up with a monstrous overprice technological wonder that many folks can't afford, but I have faith that Sony won't take that route.
Gnizmo said:
And they fucked up because anyone in their first year of engineering school should know better than to create a device with no set purpose. To make that mistake is, quite frankly, inexcusable from a hardware design perspective. Someone can always succeed despite handicaps, but those should never have been there. When you realize their intention was never to make money on the hardware, but the software side the whole situation just becomes comical. Don't worry about how easy it is to develop software for a device meant to make the majority of its money off of software. Who though that was a good idea? |
This strategy seemed to work for the ps2. The games get better for the system over time. That's just the way it is.
Gnizmo said:
???????????????????????????????????????????????????? The games would be better, and more plentiful with a properly designed system. what the hell ae you talking about,ther is always space for better games and PS3 games are the best looking console games so what are you comparing and saying better to You could get games at Uncharted 2 et al level of visuals and polish much earlier in the generation. no you wouldn't you could only get is on an easy PC architecture but that are too costly to run an uncharted 2 game in 2006 Look at how well effective Nintendo is at getting top level games out insanely early in the consoles development cycle. Wii architecture was older so people were already used to it. older architecture provides faster games but not better ones And they fucked up because anyone in their first year of engineering school should know better than to create a device with no set purpose. so a first year engineering student could develop a CELL which cost $400million?? it has been the only machine yet to be hacked.now thats big time it is the most powerful machine for its cost and a super computer at $299 it is the most powerful console till now. there is always space for better things but that is future.ATM PS3 tops everything To make that mistake is, quite frankly, inexcusable from a hardware design perspective. Someone can always succeed despite handicaps, but those should never have been there. what handicaps? and just because HW design is different doesn't mean it bad.its just that people like you and the lazy devs who don't work much and want to make money just keep whinning When you realize their intention was never to make money on the hardware, but the software side the whole situation just becomes comical. Don't worry about how easy it is to develop software for a device meant to make the majority of its money off of software. Who though that was a good idea? how do you know what their intention was? and their intention was to have a loss at first and psuh blu-ray and then start making money.they are making money on PS3 Hardware right now. and the software is picking up too. |
oldschoolfool said:
This strategy seemed to work for the ps2. The games get better for the system over time. That's just the way it is. |
the games get better with time but halt after sometime
and they are piracy plagued
as if PS3 games aren't getting better with time
Glad to hear it. It only makes sense to give the game developers the tools they want rather than dumping a machine on them and saying "here you go, make some games". An easier and more efficient platform for game developers should mean higher quality games earlier in the life cycle of the system and reduced cost of game production because of shorter development time. Seems pretty win-win to me.
This strategy seemed to work for the ps2. The games get better for the system over time. That's just the way it is.""oldschoolfool said:
It doesn't make it a good one though. You only get lucky so many times as the PS3 proves.
Solid_Snake4RD said:
|
Do you even understand what you are arguing? In this very thread Sony admits to not having made the PS3 with games in mind. Further, it is well publicized that they use the razor blade business model which is sell the hardware at a loss and make profit on the software. The fact that you try to argue against those two points makes it clear you have no interest in a debate of facts here.
To further under-cut your argument didn't you say earlier there was no communication between parts Sony? So how could they plan on using the PS3 to push Blu-ray? They weren't communicating by your own argument, and thus wouldn't have had that master plan. Either you have to concede it was a conscious decision to cut out the software side, or leave the blu-ray argument at home. The two are incompatible.
I also didn't mention the Wii once did I? I mentioned Nintendo because they are relevant. Super Mario World, Pilot Wings 64, Mario 64, Super Smash Brothers Brawl, and Wii Sports are games that have been amongst the most loved and played the entire generation. They are all either launch titles, or within two months of launch. Thats the advantage you get when your programmers get what they want out of hardware. Better sooner.
And yes, creating a system not designed to do its primary task is a handicap. The same applied to Windows originally which directly led to the creation of DirectX in order to help give better control to game developers. I don't know why you would claim it is only whiners when Sony ADMITS they haven't worked well enough with software developers in the past.
Here is the bottom line. Sony admits they were wrong in the past, and it was a bad idea. They have done a great step forward for their future hardware. I am eager to see what happens just from a game availability standpoint because developers will have access to the tools they want guaranteed. Why are you arguing against their new direction? There are two sides, and only two sides here. Sony was right with the PS3, or Sony will be right with the PS4. I choose the latter. There is no way to reconcile the two points of view though.
Darth Tigris said:
So Sony is copying what MS did with the 360? GOOD FOR THEM. They're already learning from their mistakes this gen and will be better off for it. One thing that will be interesting going forward, though, is with Sony and MS both taking this route next time around, how different will their next consoles really be from one another? What will distinguish them? |
Don't you mean... doing what Nintendo and SEGA (during the DC days) did?
MS copied them first you know :P
Bet with Dr.A.Peter.Nintendo that Super Mario Galaxy 2 won't sell 15 million copies up to six months after it's release, the winner will get Avatar control for a week and signature control for a month.
| RageBot said: Don't you mean... doing what Nintendo and SEGA (during the DC days) did? MS copied them first you know :P |
Sega and Nintendo likely copied it from someone else. The thought that there is a whole lot of originality in large corporations is almost as laughable as the thought that copying what works is somehow bad. I LIKE it when companies company each other, and then improve on the technique. The consumer ends up being the big winner.
Just like GameCube, eh?
Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee 3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046
Of course they will make it easier for developers on their next generation console. They have all this time to figure out how their architechture could be simplified for better efficiency, so of course they will do it. Not for developers, but to better their console in a general sense, which happens to help developers as well. They would have done it to start with, except it takes time to figure things out. So yea, the PS4 will be a simplier console that is yet far more complex.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
