If a game is available on PC why not show it at it's highest. Although Far Cry 4 will probably be downgraded. If it is exclusive then don't show the PC version that will never be released. Fairly simple I would have thought.

If a game is available on PC why not show it at it's highest. Although Far Cry 4 will probably be downgraded. If it is exclusive then don't show the PC version that will never be released. Fairly simple I would have thought.

RolStoppable said:
Console manufacturers put billions on the line when they launch a gaming platform, this makes it perfectly reasonable that they get to dictate the rules instead of the outsiders who would like to make games for them. Third parties ditched Nintendo for Sega (and later Sony, and later Microsoft) because they got more power there. Why do you think has gaming nowadays unfinished $60 games that receive large day 1 patches, not to mention paid DLC and microtransactions? |
You're presenting a problem without a solution. Do you really think it's a good idea for Sony and Microsoft to tell publishers they can't release their games when they want? The only way to get a publisher to change their tactics is to hit them where it hurts, their wallets. As long as they keep making money, they won't change a thing.
Sigs are dumb. And so are you!
Fusioncode said:
You're right. It'd be smarter for Sony to be like Nintendo and not listen to 3rd parties at all. That worked out well for the WiiU right? It's just flooded with games! |
You seem confused.
The Wii U is what Nintendo gets when it tries to appease 3rd parties. Poor differentiation, which bores customers and leads to competition on price/performance that only benefits the publishers.
The Wii was the console that ignored the 3rd parties, thoroughly differentiated itself, earning more profit than any home console in history and commanding better third party support as a result.
But I must be confused, too. I'm not clear how anything Nintendo does excuses Sony for being a puppet company willing to decieve its "customers" on behalf of its real clients. You really don't see a problem when the customer that's buying a DRM solution becomes more important than the customer that buys computer hardware?

"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event." — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.
famousringo said:
You seem confused. The Wii U is what Nintendo gets when it tries to appease 3rd parties. Poor differentiation, which bores customers and leads to competition on price/performance that only benefits the publishers. Yeah weak HW and a useless tablet controller really gave 3rd parties want they want. Good job Nintendo. The Wii was the console that ignored the 3rd parties, thoroughly differentiated itself, earning more profit than any home console in history and commanding better third party support as a result. The Wii was also lightning in a bottle. Every other console depends on 3rd parties to survive. But I must be confused, too. I'm not clear how anything Nintendo does excuses Sony for being a puppet company willing to decieve its "customers" on behalf of its real clients. You really don't see a problem when the customer that's buying a DRM solution becomes more important than the customer that buys computer hardware? Decieve it's customers? As far as I can tell Sony showed off their games on PS4 hardware. Again, 3rd parties use PCs to show off their games in the best light. It's like models almost always get photoshopped in magazines. |
Sigs are dumb. And so are you!
hasn't sony been doing this for years,even before microsoft had a console
surely nintendo must be naughty sometimes,what was their conference running on this year a WiiU or Bluray

I smell like the dark forest of Dwemereth in the morning mist
fanboy til i'm bankrupt
So the game got pushed back obviously isnt finished is far form well polished yet and the dev decides to show the version fo the game thats running best at E3 and someone gets surprised by it ?
|
'Cause I'm pretty sure people are expecting to see Playstation games at the Sony conference, not PC games. To suggest that Sony just does whatever a publisher tells them to do, even at their own conference, like some kind of obedient, well-trained hound... ... encapsulates the state of the console market quite effectively, actually. |
Sony probably approaches a developer or vice versa and they hit up an agreement that sony will dedicate a certain time slot at the conference for the developer. The developer decides what they want to show and that's it.
Max King of the Wild said:
|
I'm sure its not that simple. Sony will probably go over what exactly they will show and how long it will take, and even what the developer would say. After all, they don't want the developer speaking badly about playstation or in favour of the competiiton.
MoHasanie said:
I'm sure its not that simple. Sony will probably go over what exactly they will show and how long it will take, and even what the developer would say. After all, they don't want the developer speaking badly about playstation or in favour of the competiiton. |
You're making the simple complicated. Sony will know if it's a trailer, gameplay or live demo. That obviouslyBbe discussed in time slot. But to think Sony can tell them what to show is ludicrous
I don care.
Thats Uncharted 4z graphics. GREATNESS AWAITS
Nobody's perfect. I aint nobody!!!
Killzone 2. its not a fps. it a FIRST PERSON WAR SIMULATOR!!!! ..The true PLAYSTATION 3 launch date and market dominations is SEP 1st ![]()