Diablerie said:
http://www.vgchartz.com/games/index.php?name=tekken+6 Just because the "audience number" is lower, doesn't meant it won't sell more, and even without Japan, FFXIII will sell more on PS3. |
exactly dude exactly
Diablerie said:
http://www.vgchartz.com/games/index.php?name=tekken+6 Just because the "audience number" is lower, doesn't meant it won't sell more, and even without Japan, FFXIII will sell more on PS3. |
exactly dude exactly
voty2000 said:
That would be like living in the Matrix |
i do research before buying it's call 'being a smart consumer' not trying to diss ya but it's an actual term
I don't.
Maybe if PS3 was in first.
Why should I expect a company to make a superior version of the game on the console with the lowest userbase. They risk upsetting the 360 crowd for making an "inferior port"
They can afford to alienate PS3 owners a LOT more then they can 360 owners.
I should point out that the average gamer (i.e not us internet folks) won't care or notice the compressing or whatever, point of interest, folks who bought Bayonetta for the ps3 regardless of how inferior to the 360 it was.
using me as an example, till today I still don't get the purpose of comparisons made by Lens of truth and the likes comparing stuff like SF4 and RE5 went over me because
A: I really saw no difference between the 2 games in their pictures
B: regardless of what was said, I still played aforementioned games on my ps3, why?
I: I only have a ps3, my choices are limited, it's either take it or lump it, if I choose to lump it, it really is no skin off their nose because they can a: count on other ps3 folks to buy their games
b: There's also the small matter of 360 folks.
II: Even if I did have a 360, at the end of the day I would only buy games for my favoured console.
Also, note: if every ps3 owner boycotts poor ports, that only confirms that the port was not worth the effort and stops future folks from making ports because they ask "why bother?"
WilliamWatts said: You've benefited rather than lost from 'console equality'. Honestly if there wasn't such a big stink put up several years ago you would still be playing substandard PS3 ports, or not playing them and missing out. Also you're assuming that the games actually need to fill the Blu Ray disc, when infact most games fit just fine on a smaller disc. I once looked at the Xbox 360 install size comparisons when I was considering buying that console and most of the games came in under the 6.8GB limit. If they needed more space they would have filled out the Xbox 360s disc first, right? |
and thats why im making a roar about it too. if im paying 60$ for a 25/50gb blu-ray disk why is my content removed and why is my files in a lesser format? also with richer formats and uncompresseed content it'll take more than 8 gb, why do you think ff13 had content removed and files compressed for the 360 and unnecessarily for the ps3?
Kasz216 said: I don't. Maybe if PS3 was in first. Why should I expect a company to make a superior version of the game on the console with the lowest userbase. They risk upsetting the 360 crowd for making an "inferior port" They can afford to alienate PS3 owners a LOT more then they can 360 owners. |
read my other comments that answer this. ps3 has the lead in others and japan. Ms NA, but NA is no longer the main region to win with are down economy at the moment. this isnt the 90's where you had to win NA in order to survive. so why rob us? why continue to practice 'console equality'?
rynx said:
read my other comments that answer this. ps3 has the lead in others and japan. Ms NA, but NA is no longer the main region to win with are down economy at the moment. this isnt the 90's where you had to win NA in order to survive. so why rob us? why continue to practice 'console equality'? |
No...
the Us still is the main region to win at the moment... even with the economic times.
Japan is actually LESS relevent then it was in the 90's.
Notice how companies like SE are desperatly trying to appeal more to the western audience.
With regards to ps3 versions of game selling better than 360's, I argue that it's the exception not the norm. points of interest, on this site alone, 2 multies are in the top 10 Darksiders and COD:MW2 the 360 version of both games are doing better than the ps3's.
I agree the ps3 version of ff13 will do better, but I argue that no matter how much it sells, do you really think that will be enough for SE?
Goes back to my arguement of less effort+more returns=win.
If this was a 360 exclusive originally, I argue E3 '08 would not have happened in Sony's direction why?
1: too much work to port
2: Not garunteed to be successful if past trends are to be believed.
3: (personal belief) for some reason, SE amongst others are more willing to please MS than Sony atm so the liklihood of ps3 ports being perfected to match the 360 counterpart is unlikely.
Ajescent said: This I'm afraid is the price you have to pay for backing one horse over the other, folks who go for both get the best of both worlds but if you opt to be ps3 only then you have to make do with getting the short hand or nothing at all. Point of interest, Bayonetta This game was never meant to come to the ps3 but Sega went out of their way to make it. On the one hand you could argue Sega just wanted the munniez but on the other hand, a ps3 only owner doesn't have a chance to play it unless they are thrown bones. But then there's the question of games like FF13 and Tekken 6 Why settle for busting your gut to make a game for a console that has the least amount of owners only to get small change when you can port to a higher install and getting high(er) returns? When you are catering for a higher audience on an easier machine, folks are more inclined to work harder to maximise their product but if it's on a harder machine with lesser audience number...the insentive really isn't there to bust a gut. So by being a ps3 only owner, you are signing up to inferior ports and suspect hand me downs, begs the question, would you rather play a shoddy version of your 3rd party favourites on your ps3 or not at all? |
Aaaaand you totally missed the point. He is saying that FFXIII had a bunch of content on the PS3 version that was taken out because it could not fit on the 360 version and they wanted to make the games even. I don't understand how having both a 360 and PS3 would get you that content back in the game...
As for Bayonetta it is quite the opposite of what he is complaining about. Had Sega made the 360 version gimped just because they couldn't get the PS3 version to work just as good then that would be a similar situation. What the guy wants is for them to stop gimping PS3 games because they can't get certain things on the 360. In bayonetta they didn't gimp the 360 version they just let the PS3 version suck while not taking away from the 360 version. Precisely what he wants SE to do with FFXIII.
Next gen, this won't be nearly as big of a problem if the 720 has blu-ray, and this gen, sony is coming back, so they won't have as hard of a time getting exclusives, so either way, just have faith.