By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
rynx on 14 January 2010
Ajescent said:
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?"

again ill put it simple what you are saying is debatable. also the average gamer not caring or not being inform/noticing is the fault of the developers who are practicing 'console equality' therefor sony can not properly advertise. things get advertise everywhere billards, tv, radio, commercials, internet, but what can they talk about if both versions look the same? and why? of course you arent going to notice any difference if both games are identical even though the other can hold more content and use better, richer auido/video formats wouldnt that make is noticable? to anyone?



Around the Network
WilliamWatts on 14 January 2010
rynx said:
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?

You're still making some assumption that:

A. The missing content exists.

B. The PS3 can take advantage of higher bit rate content.

Lossless sound and less lossy video compression still requires a higher transfer rate and it may very well be that the PS3 is not space limited but transfer limited. It would take between 4-8* as long for the PS3 to read an entire BRD compared to the Xbox 360 reading a single DVD.

So what content was 'removed' from FFXIII? The games never came with the Japanese sound track before and they left a lot of content out due to design considerations. For the rest see above.



rynx on 14 January 2010
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
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'?

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.

 

sorry to inform you it's not. if you do not know this i feel sorry for you. europe is the region to win. if you invest all your time and money to a region thats in a economic crisis and people are skeptical to buy and also those who are losing their jobs you will go banrupt lol. why do you think after the price cut sony started outselling the 360? people want to save money and invest on something that can be use for anything and for cheap



Kasz216 on 14 January 2010
rynx said:
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
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'?

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.

 

sorry to inform you it's not. if you do not know this i feel sorry for you. europe is the region to win. if you invest all your time and money to a region thats in a economic crisis and people are skeptical to buy and also those who are losing their jobs you will go banrupt lol. why do you think after the price cut sony started outselling the 360? people want to save money and invest on something that can be use for anything and for cheap

Er... you do know the economic crisis hit europe as well right?

It actually hurt some europeon countries harder then the US.



Ajescent on 14 January 2010

My overall point was that as a ps3 owner you should be used to and be willing to accept you're gonna get fucked which ever way possible, so best get used to it. I should have made that more clearer.



PS One/2/p/3slim/Vita owner. I survived the Apocalyps3/Collaps3 and all I got was this lousy signature.


Xbox One: What are you doing Dave?

Around the Network
binary solo on 14 January 2010

I don't understand the problem:

If you are getting the same game and the same gaming experience and paying the same price regardless of the console then why is that bad? like quality for like price, it's exactly as it should be.

If you are getting an inferior product (notably deficient port) and paying the same price then that is bad. Unlike quality for like price is unethical, but since when have corporations been ethical entities?

But I fail to see what either situation has got to do with the data capacity of the Blu-Ray.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

rynx on 14 January 2010
Ajescent said:
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.

all you doing is repeating yourself and it's quit annoying. again read my other comments. more consumers doesnt mean more sales. again ps3 owners are aware about console equality. dont you think that if people knew they're are getting longer content, uncompressed audio/video it will sale more on the ps3?? especially if advertise to the consumers properly? dont you think people from the 36o will buy either a ps3 or the ps3 version of the game? console equality is hurting ps3 sales. because its not on just 1 game but all multiplatform games. batman is an example it sold more on the ps3 i believe. please stop repeating yourself



Ajescent on 14 January 2010
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
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'?

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.

 

sorry to inform you it's not. if you do not know this i feel sorry for you. europe is the region to win. if you invest all your time and money to a region thats in a economic crisis and people are skeptical to buy and also those who are losing their jobs you will go banrupt lol. why do you think after the price cut sony started outselling the 360? people want to save money and invest on something that can be use for anything and for cheap

Er... you do know the economic crisis hit europe as well right?

It actually hurt some europeon countries harder then the US.


Thanks to the Recession, Iceland (the whole country) went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the UK, France and Germany, they are still in the woods right now.



PS One/2/p/3slim/Vita owner. I survived the Apocalyps3/Collaps3 and all I got was this lousy signature.


Xbox One: What are you doing Dave?

rynx on 14 January 2010
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
Kasz216 said:
rynx said:
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'?

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.

 

sorry to inform you it's not. if you do not know this i feel sorry for you. europe is the region to win. if you invest all your time and money to a region thats in a economic crisis and people are skeptical to buy and also those who are losing their jobs you will go banrupt lol. why do you think after the price cut sony started outselling the 360? people want to save money and invest on something that can be use for anything and for cheap

Er... you do know the economic crisis hit europe as well right?

It actually hurt some europeon countries harder then the US.

are you kidding me lol? if i recall the value of the pound and euro just went up recently i dont know how long ago. also if i recall the currecny for china went up as well and china is part of "others"



rynx on 14 January 2010

well i have to go hang with my g/f. if youre going to post please read my comment and stop repeating yourself. also have common sense and actual knowledge. overall good arguments  was kept clean.