Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: smbu2000 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Cheebee said: That's kinda childish. :p I noticed this too: 'DualShock 3 Announced after the failure of the 'Sixaxis' PS3 controller. After previously stating 'Rumble was last-gen' and 'Rumble wouldn't work in a motion-sensing controller', Sony ate their own words and once again copied Nintendo. They released this slightly updated version of their 'last-gen' controller, much to the amusement of the entire gaming world, and once again proving Sony reps are not to be taken too seriously.' :p Why is everyone taking a low blow about the "no-rumble" when I've seen so many Nintendo fanboys going "Z0MG!! S0NY C0P13D RUMB13!!" in the PS2 generation...my friends were STILL hung up on that when vibration had pretty much become a standard. Also, Sony didn't take out rumble because "it was last-gen", it was because of legal issues with Immersion. Did people miss this memo? When Immersion SUED Sony AND Microsoft? I'm sure you'd be pissed if you were sued as well. They were probably just like "Forget it, we'll worry about it later, rumble isn't needed." Plus, things change. You think because they made the rumble and sixaxis possible with each other, they were lieing before? That's like saying it's impossible to improve a car to have more horsepower with time and work of a company that specializes with vehicles. Rome wasn't built in a day, ways to do things previously thought impossible come about. Sony did say that though. In an interview with Phil Harrison early last year: http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/phil-harrison-we-are-under-no-pressure-to-drop-ps3s-price/70094/?biz=1 BIZ: A lot of gamers, including myself, enjoy the controller's motion sensing at times, but we still miss rumble. If gamers want it and are vocal enough, will Sony reintroduce the force feedback at some point? PH: We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties.   I didn't say that it wasn't said, I was just saying the Immersion suit was probably the main reason they didn't go with rumble. I'm just pointing out that people are misinformed about this whole rumble thing. You can't say after getting sued by Immersion by having rumble in their controllers that it had nothing to do with it. That's actually worse. That they lied directly to the consumers... then didn't even stay consistant with the lie. You gotta stick to your lies. Look at OJ. It worked for him. It's bad that they based their decision on a financial issue rather than an emotional one? Companies don't remove a feature because they feel it is "last-gen". Companies don't make decisions based on emotion. They make their decisions based on what the consumer wants or the money the company has to blow. If a company does something because they want to, are you really going to trust that company much? It's better to have a company that doesn't appeal to emotion and makes logical decisions. It was a legal and financial issue at the time, now it isn't and they're bringing rumble in. Make sense? Plus, it's the cold hard truth, companies lie. Including Nintendo and Microsoft, no major company is completely honest. They all try to hide things, every company is corrupted to some point. It's bad because they directly lied about it to the consumer. Rather then saying "We're not putting it in because it's a last gen feature." Had they said "The current sixaxis controller does not have rumble due to a lawsuit." As such they should get ragged on about it. As should any other companies that get caught in their lies. Most companies also don't outright lie. They spin. Which is different, and bad, though not as bad.

 When did Phil Harrison say that they're removing rumble because it's a "last-gen feature? When did Phil Harrison represent all of Sony? All Phil Harrison said was "Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature." Where in there did Phil Harrison ever say "We're removing rumble because we think it's a last-gen feature."?

 All he said was what he believed and what he thought. No where in there did they say why they removed rumble. He just answered the question on whether they would be introducing rumble or not to the system in the future and continued on with his thoughts on the rumble versus the Six-Axis. Phil Harrison addresses his thoughts on the matter and everybody goes insane like that was the reason Sony removed the rumble? That is kind of silly. Why they removed rumble wasn't mentioned, just what Phil Harrison thought about it.

Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: smbu2000 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Cheebee said: That's kinda childish. :p I noticed this too: 'DualShock 3 Announced after the failure of the 'Sixaxis' PS3 controller. After previously stating 'Rumble was last-gen' and 'Rumble wouldn't work in a motion-sensing controller', Sony ate their own words and once again copied Nintendo. They released this slightly updated version of their 'last-gen' controller, much to the amusement of the entire gaming world, and once again proving Sony reps are not to be taken too seriously.' :p Why is everyone taking a low blow about the "no-rumble" when I've seen so many Nintendo fanboys going "Z0MG!! S0NY C0P13D RUMB13!!" in the PS2 generation...my friends were STILL hung up on that when vibration had pretty much become a standard. Also, Sony didn't take out rumble because "it was last-gen", it was because of legal issues with Immersion. Did people miss this memo? When Immersion SUED Sony AND Microsoft? I'm sure you'd be pissed if you were sued as well. They were probably just like "Forget it, we'll worry about it later, rumble isn't needed." Plus, things change. You think because they made the rumble and sixaxis possible with each other, they were lieing before? That's like saying it's impossible to improve a car to have more horsepower with time and work of a company that specializes with vehicles. Rome wasn't built in a day, ways to do things previously thought impossible come about. Sony did say that though. In an interview with Phil Harrison early last year: http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/phil-harrison-we-are-under-no-pressure-to-drop-ps3s-price/70094/?biz=1 BIZ: A lot of gamers, including myself, enjoy the controller's motion sensing at times, but we still miss rumble. If gamers want it and are vocal enough, will Sony reintroduce the force feedback at some point? PH: We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties. I didn't say that it wasn't said, I was just saying the Immersion suit was probably the main reason they didn't go with rumble. I'm just pointing out that people are misinformed about this whole rumble thing. You can't say after getting sued by Immersion by having rumble in their controllers that it had nothing to do with it. That's actually worse. That they lied directly to the consumers... then didn't even stay consistant with the lie. You gotta stick to your lies. Look at OJ. It worked for him. It's bad that they based their decision on a financial issue rather than an emotional one? Companies don't remove a feature because they feel it is "last-gen". Companies don't make decisions based on emotion. They make their decisions based on what the consumer wants or the money the company has to blow. If a company does something because they want to, are you really going to trust that company much? It's better to have a company that doesn't appeal to emotion and makes logical decisions. It was a legal and financial issue at the time, now it isn't and they're bringing rumble in. Make sense? Plus, it's the cold hard truth, companies lie. Including Nintendo and Microsoft, no major company is completely honest. They all try to hide things, every company is corrupted to some point. It's bad because they directly lied about it to the consumer. Rather then saying "We're not putting it in because it's a last gen feature." Had they said "The current sixaxis controller does not have rumble due to a lawsuit." As such they should get ragged on about it. As should any other companies that get caught in their lies. Most companies also don't outright lie. They spin. Which is different, and bad, though not as bad. When did Phil Harrison say that they're removing rumble because it's a "last-gen feature? When did Phil Harrison represent all of Sony? All Phil Harrison said was "Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature." Where in there did Phil Harrison ever say "We're removing rumble because we think it's a last-gen feature."? All he said was what he believed and what he thought. No where in there did they say why they removed rumble. He just answered the question on whether they would be introducing rumble or not to the system in the future and continued on with his thoughts on the rumble versus the Six-Axis. Phil Harrison addresses his thoughts on the matter and everybody goes insane like that was the reason Sony removed the rumble? That is kind of silly. Why they removed rumble wasn't mentioned, just what Phil Harrison thought about it.

Are you serious?  He speaks for Sony since he's a senior executive doing authorized interviews.  If you think he was talking out of his ass you are gravely mistaken.  He directly implied that the Sixaxis does not have rumble because "next-gen" controllers do not have any need of that "last-gen" feature, when the reality was that it lacked rumble because Sony got its ass handed to it in a lawsuit, and as soon as the legal issues were over, lo and behold there is rumble in the PS3 standard controllers. 

In fact, you yourself have apparently switched positions on this.  You said:
They were probably just like "Forget it, we'll worry about it later, rumble isn't needed."
Since Phil Harrison said:
We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3.
then obviously, if you were right, then Sony, as an authorized spokesperson for Sony, lied.  He did not say that as thought or opinion or as speculation, but as a statement of fact.  We DO NOT have plans at this time to ever do that. 

Final-Fan said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Kasz216 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: smbu2000 said: Lone_Canis_Lupus said: Cheebee said: That's kinda childish. :p I noticed this too: 'DualShock 3 Announced after the failure of the 'Sixaxis' PS3 controller. After previously stating 'Rumble was last-gen' and 'Rumble wouldn't work in a motion-sensing controller', Sony ate their own words and once again copied Nintendo. They released this slightly updated version of their 'last-gen' controller, much to the amusement of the entire gaming world, and once again proving Sony reps are not to be taken too seriously.' :p Why is everyone taking a low blow about the "no-rumble" when I've seen so many Nintendo fanboys going "Z0MG!! S0NY C0P13D RUMB13!!" in the PS2 generation...my friends were STILL hung up on that when vibration had pretty much become a standard. Also, Sony didn't take out rumble because "it was last-gen", it was because of legal issues with Immersion. Did people miss this memo? When Immersion SUED Sony AND Microsoft? I'm sure you'd be pissed if you were sued as well. They were probably just like "Forget it, we'll worry about it later, rumble isn't needed." Plus, things change. You think because they made the rumble and sixaxis possible with each other, they were lieing before? That's like saying it's impossible to improve a car to have more horsepower with time and work of a company that specializes with vehicles. Rome wasn't built in a day, ways to do things previously thought impossible come about. Sony did say that though. In an interview with Phil Harrison early last year: http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/phil-harrison-we-are-under-no-pressure-to-drop-ps3s-price/70094/?biz=1 BIZ: A lot of gamers, including myself, enjoy the controller's motion sensing at times, but we still miss rumble. If gamers want it and are vocal enough, will Sony reintroduce the force feedback at some point? PH: We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. I believe that the Sixaxis controller offers game designers and developers far more opportunity for future innovation than rumble ever did. Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties. I didn't say that it wasn't said, I was just saying the Immersion suit was probably the main reason they didn't go with rumble. I'm just pointing out that people are misinformed about this whole rumble thing. You can't say after getting sued by Immersion by having rumble in their controllers that it had nothing to do with it. That's actually worse. That they lied directly to the consumers... then didn't even stay consistant with the lie. You gotta stick to your lies. Look at OJ. It worked for him. It's bad that they based their decision on a financial issue rather than an emotional one? Companies don't remove a feature because they feel it is "last-gen". Companies don't make decisions based on emotion. They make their decisions based on what the consumer wants or the money the company has to blow. If a company does something because they want to, are you really going to trust that company much? It's better to have a company that doesn't appeal to emotion and makes logical decisions. It was a legal and financial issue at the time, now it isn't and they're bringing rumble in. Make sense? Plus, it's the cold hard truth, companies lie. Including Nintendo and Microsoft, no major company is completely honest. They all try to hide things, every company is corrupted to some point. It's bad because they directly lied about it to the consumer. Rather then saying "We're not putting it in because it's a last gen feature." Had they said "The current sixaxis controller does not have rumble due to a lawsuit." As such they should get ragged on about it. As should any other companies that get caught in their lies. Most companies also don't outright lie. They spin. Which is different, and bad, though not as bad. When did Phil Harrison say that they're removing rumble because it's a "last-gen feature? When did Phil Harrison represent all of Sony? All Phil Harrison said was "Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature." Where in there did Phil Harrison ever say "We're removing rumble because we think it's a last-gen feature."? All he said was what he believed and what he thought. No where in there did they say why they removed rumble. He just answered the question on whether they would be introducing rumble or not to the system in the future and continued on with his thoughts on the rumble versus the Six-Axis. Phil Harrison addresses his thoughts on the matter and everybody goes insane like that was the reason Sony removed the rumble? That is kind of silly. Why they removed rumble wasn't mentioned, just what Phil Harrison thought about it. Are you serious? He speaks for Sony since he's a senior executive doing authorized interviews. If you think he was talking out of his ass you are gravely mistaken. He directly implied that the Sixaxis does not have rumble because "next-gen" controllers do not have any need of that "last-gen" feature, when the reality was that it lacked rumble because Sony got its ass handed to it in a lawsuit, and as soon as the legal issues were over, lo and behold there is rumble in the PS3 standard controllers. In fact, you yourself have apparently switched positions on this. You said: They were probably just like "Forget it, we'll worry about it later, rumble isn't needed." Since Phil Harrison said: We have no plans to do so in the standard controller that ships with PlayStation 3. then obviously, if you were right, then Sony, as an authorized spokesperson for Sony, lied. He did not say that as thought or opinion or as speculation, but as a statement of fact. We DO NOT have plans at this time to ever do that.

 Ah, in fact you just repeated pretty much what I said in that last part. They said they had to plans in doing so. They answered the question given to them. This was on what they planned on doing in the FUTURE, not on what just happened. They weren't asked "Why was rumble not included?" but rather "Will rumble be included in future controllers?"

All he said at was they had no plans to do so in the future. Does that mean one can not change ones mind? They could not have had plans at the time at all and decided to make plans for rumble later on. Think about this. A friend can ask me if I want to go to a party of their's this weekend and I could already have plans for this weekend, so I say "No, sorry, I already have plans"...now say things change, something came up and I can't go do what I had planned for that weekend. Instead, I call up my friend again and say "Change of plans, is that invite for the party still up?"

 The thing is, as time goes on, things change. It's just a fact. He was asked a question, he answered it with "We don't have plans" and made a comment on what HE thought about the subject. His views don't neccesarly represent the views of the whole company. He wasn't asked WHY they didn't include rumble but if they WERE going to include rumble in the future. I didn't switch positions. They could have had trouble at the time with it and things changed later on.

You don't understand. Here's an analogy:

You get together with friends once a month. This month you are getting ready to leave when you find out that someone slashed your tires. You call AAA (American Automobile Association) and while you're on hold a friend calls you (your phone can do this) and asks if you're coming and you say "I don't plan on it, no." Then AAA answers, and you call them out to replace your tires and you go to the party an hour or two late.

Were you lying when you said you had no plans to go to the party? I think you were.

I think this analogy fits much better to the situation with Sony/PS3/Dual Shock/Immersion than yours does.  If you disagree, please explain why. 

the person is going to get caught, people who edit wiki have there IP adress saved by the sight, so they will know from which computer it was edited on

For the record, Phil Harrison's quote was apparently uttered on Feb. 26, 2007.
"Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties."
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/phil-harrison-we-are-under-no-pressure-to-drop-ps3s-price/70094/?biz=1

THREE DAYS LATER:

"Sony came to a settlement with Immersion, with an announcement on March 1, 2007 that two companies were planning to "explore the inclusion of Immersion technology in PlayStation format products.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DualShock

Final-Fan said: You don't understand. Here's an analogy: You get together with friends once a month. This month you are getting ready to leave when you find out that someone slashed your tires. You call AAA (American Auto. Assoc.) and while you're on hold a friend calls you (your phone can do this) and asks if you're coming and you say "I don't plan on it, no." Then AAA answers, and you call them out to replace your tires and you go to the party an hour or two late. Were you lying when you said you had no plans to go to the party? I think you were.

 Did Sony ever say they didn't have plans on putting rumble in the controller? Sony was sued by Immersion. All we can assume is that that was the reason they weren't including rumble was because of that. They said they didn't have plans, and I don't think there was anything to indicate that they had plans. We have no way of knowing if they did have plans. Either way, the Immersion suit was an inconvienence and Sony was stumped by it. They were asked if they had plans, they said they didn't as they were still in the Immersion thing.

 To add on to the analogy, you assume the worst and say "I don't have plans" because you're not sure if you're going to be able to make it on time. You don't know if AAA will get to you before the party is over, you didn't have a response before asked. You can't just assume "They'll get here on time, I'll tell my friend I'm going." And what if when you finally get a response, it's too late? That lie is just as bad as saying you're not coming because you said you'd come but you never did because of the timing. AAA might have been held up, or have an insufficient amount of employees. Even though unlikely, you don't just say "Yes, I will be coming" if you're not sure.

 Sony might have assumed the worst with Immersion instead of going out and saying "Don't worry, we plan on getting rumble back at so and so time." If Sony had made this claim and ended up having to push it back further if Immersion ended up making some unexpected move. Then instead of being pissed about being told it wasn't coming, people would be outraged that they were told it was coming soon and it ended up being pushed further or not come at all.

  You don't make claims you're not sure of. You can either say "I don't know" or "No, no plans at the moment." If you make claims you can't back up, chances are a lot of people will be pissed at you. A lot more than if you were to just do something you said you had no plans on doing before. 

Final-Fan said: For the record, Phil Harrison's quote was apparently uttered on Feb. 26, 2007. "Now, rumble I think was the last generation feature; it's not the next-generation feature. I think motion sensitivity is. And we don't see the need to do that. Having said that, there will be specific game function controllers, potentially like steering wheels that do include vibration or feedback function—not from us but from third parties." http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/features/phil-harrison-we-are-under-no-pressure-to-drop-ps3s-price/70094/?biz=1 THREE DAYS LATER: "Sony came to a settlement with Immersion, with an announcement on March 1, 2007 that two companies were planning to "explore the inclusion of Immersion technology in PlayStation format products."" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DualShock

 

 Even though it's three days after and that's a close time frame. If you're in that position, would you be sure the opposite party would agree on the settlement? You can guess, but you're not sure. So you still don't go make claims you won't be able to back up. It would still be wise to say "I don't know, maybe" or "No, not at the moment." Just for clarification, I don't know how quickly these things happen. How long of a timeframe are settlements like that usually reached? I'm not familiar with civil cases.

C'mon guys, let it go already, Sony stated something, then did the exact opposite. What else is new?

Cheebee said: C'mon guys, let it go already, Sony stated something, then did the exact opposite. What else is new?

 Question. What would you be more pissed about, someone lying about something they said they were going to do or someone that did something they said they weren't planning on doing?