1. Sony has already slashed the number of units being delivered, due to anticipated lack of demand in the US and EU. This will create an artificial shortage so that they can try to spin it into buzz about how people want PS3 consoles. They already figure that the Wii will sell four times as many consoles in the US and EU as the PS3 will. Shipments prove this.
I agree with your last two statements. But the first one? FUD!
It's the same thing folks threw out with the 360 launch. They couldn't imagine that people would actually be willing to buy the console, so there MUST have been an artificial shortage... right? Bzzzt. It's just good 'ole, "supply unable to keep up with demand". MS just couldn't make enough of the boxes. With the recent news of 2005-created 360s having possible manufacturing problems, I think we have an idea why there was a shortage: not enough consoles to meet the quality bar, and arguably, too many that still shipped despite of it.
It's going to be the same with the PS3, but worse. The production of brand new hardware always has wrinkles in it, as well as general quality issues. Then there's also the news of a shortage of blue lasers, which is affecting high-def DVD manufacturers everywhere.
Despite all the (seemingly unending) bad news about Sony, there are still going to be legions of fanbois clamoring for a console come launch day. And there will undoubtedly be a lot of entrepreneurs hoping to snag a PS3 or two (or a dozen), so they can resell them on eBay for big bucks. Anyone remember the awful rumors of GameStop employees hiding 360 boxes in the backroom, so that they could sell them for a huge profit later? Expect a repeat of that again this year.
All in all, a shortage is not a good thing for a console manufacturer, even for one that is sold at a loss. The sooner you get the platform in people's hands, the sooner they can start buying games and high-def movies. Sony's already has mind-share and buzz, even though it's not all positive. It doesn't need anymore negative news of parents and gamers complaining that they can't get a console and are looking to spend their $500-600 elsewhere (Wii or 360).
The wonderful thing about TV and especially the introduction of cable, is that there's a lot more variety now. Funny thing how most of the shows you mentioned, I don't care about at all. (I've had my fill of cop shows, thankyouvermuch)
As for Desperate Housewives, it's something my wife started watching when there was a lot of attention to it last year. I naturally caught some episodes in the background, and have to admit that it's quite the comedy at times. And yes, it's very much like your typical soap opera, only much better for some unquantifiable reason. I suspect there might a lot of other husbands, like me, that got sucked into the show and don't want to admit it. (Or maybe I'm just strange)
My wife made an excellent observation the other day. Anyone else notice that TV shows seem to be far better than the movies that have come out recently? Last year, ABC's Lost and Desperate Housewives dazzled many viewers (ourselves included). This year, I've been really impressed by NBC's Heroes and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. The writing has been quite good, although some may argue that it does degrade over time. Not to mention lots of the great shows on HBO, Showtime, and some of the excellent comedies that have come and gone (Arrested Development comes to mind). And keep in mind that most of these are original shows. TV is in a far better situation than it used to be just a few years ago, when everything had to be a "reality TV show".
This is in comparison to movies, where it seems like everything is a sequel nowadays, or some book->movie or TV->movie or game->movie port.
Why do we like sequels and franchises so much? It's the content, stupid!
Sometimes its because we really enjoy the story and characters, and want to see it continue (see the Halo, Metal Gear Solid games, among many others). Often it's because we really like that particular brand of gameplay, whether it be sports (see Madden) or a brawler (see Smash Bros), or kart racing (see Mario Kart). And often its because we really like the way a particular developer makes a game (see Final Fantasy or Grand Theft Auto, by Square-Enix and Rockstar respectively).
I think your PGR flub betrays what's actually going on here -- people are usually fondest of whichever game in a series they're exposed to first, unless a sequel really hits the ball out of the park. It's an emotional response, not a rational one.
I think a great example of this is with the ever popular Final Fantasy VII game. It was the first "FF" game for many folks, thanks to a huge advertising campaign by Square at the time. So, for all future FF games, FF7 has always been "the one" for these fanatics.
As someone who's played the FF games from the beginning, I never understood what the craze was about. FF7 is actually the only FF game I never played (I don't count the MMO FFXI), since it took a long time for me to jump to the PS1. And when I did have a chance to try it, I never got close to completing it, as there were far better RPGs around at the time. For me? The earlier FF games had a lot of charm, so for me, those are the ones I enjoyed the most. Very much an emotional response though.
I made the mistake of getting my PS2 used from a friend. (He wanted to get an import PS2 instead, so he could play Japanese games... I guess he didn't want to mod his PS2)
My PS2 still works, but its definately had its quirky moments. For the longest time, it would only work when it was vertical. I also have some older PS2 games that have just stopped working for the system at all. Very annoying. I heard a lot about PS2 class-action suits and returns, but since I got it used, I knew I could never participate in them.
My Xbox has its fair share of issues as well, with "dirty disc errors" popping up from time to time. However, it still most games fine, and all games with a tiny bit of patience. I also have a launch day 360, and apparently I've been lucky as I've had no problems with it. (I hope I haven't jinxed myself now)
I know a lot of people talked about it when Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within came out. I don't think they used the actual term "uncanny valley", but I had a lot of friends talk about how creepy the movie looked at times. In still-shots, or general action scenes, the movie looked fine. But the more personal and emotional moments, definately felt creepy at times to me and my friends. I still enjoyed the movie, for the most part, so it didn't detract TOO much, but it was certainly there.
Notice how other CG movies like Toy Story or even The Incredibles don't have this problem whatsoever, since the characters are so "cartoony" looking. And in other movies that use CG characters, they're often relegated to non-humans (such as Aslan from The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and Gollum from The Lord of the Rings). IMHO, I think it'll be a while before we have a movie like FF: Spirits Within, where the entire cast is CG yet photo-realistic.
I get the feeling you don't really follow the industry, and just like talking out of your ass. As I suspected, a troll. But I'll still bite anyway. Maybe you or someone else will learn a thing or two.:P
So you have 4 Japanese RPGs. Congratulations. Also, I like how you sneak some extra companies in at the end to try and strengthen your argument. You almost had me. Except oh wait we're talking about RPGs.
My original subject was "RPG support on 360 steadily getting better". I was comparing it to the last Xbox generation. Go to GameSpot and browse for all the Xbox RPGs and sort them by release date. You'll see that support was pitiful. First RPG for the system was Morrowind, which came out over 6 months since the Xbox first came out. The next notable RPG for the system, which was Knights of the Old Republic, didn't come out till a YEAR LATER. You'll also see a distinct lack of J-RPGs of any kind. Phantasy Star Online only sort of counts, since it was a port (came out for the Dreamcast and GameCube). There are a couple of notable RPGs that came on the scene later, such as Fable and Jade Empire, but they didn't come out till far later (2004, even 2005). And they're western-style RPGs. So, if I had to summarize, Japanese RPG support on the Xbox was pretty much close to zero.
The 4 Japanese RPGs I mentioned for the 360 is a huge increase percentage-wise, obviously. And I didn't mention the western-style RPGs coming out for the system, since that wasn't my point (you can Google if you want to read more about them). (I also forgot to mention FFXI, but that shouldn't count since it's also a port, much like PSO was) Maybe you got confused, I'm not trying to compare J-RPG support from the 360 to the PS2, and say that's even remotely close. That'd be obviously stupid.
My gut feel (sic) is that there will be a lot of disgruntled wanna-be PS3 owners, (sic) who didn't get a chance to buy the console. (Remember, it is in EXTREMELY short supply, especially in Japan) Many of them will opt for a Wii, although there are probably a number of Sakaguchi fans that will opt for a 360 just to check out his latest creation. (FYI, Sakaguchi = creator of Final Fantasy, head of Mistwalker Studios)
My gut feeling is that you're full of crap. Speculation is great, but it helps to have some evidence to back up your assertions. You have none.
Well, I was just speculating. I assumed that you did some research on the topic, or had some more knowledge of the industry, but apparently you haven't. So here I go.
Sakaguchi is a big deal. Here's the Wikipedia link for Sakaguchi-san. He's got a pretty impressive list of games there. Now, his latest creation, Blue Dragon, sports a couple of other big names. Ever heard of Akira Toriyama? He was responsible for developing the mega-popular Dragon Ball manga and anime. He's also the character designer for the extremely popular Dragon Quest series, as well as the cult-classic Chrono Trigger. Now, if that weren't enough, doing the music for the game is the ever popular Nobuo Uematsu. He did the music for many of the Final Fantasy games, as well as Chrono Trigger.
As you can imagine, all these guys have lots of fans. At the recent Tokyo Game Show, there were long lines for 360 RPGs. That actually surprised me at first, seeing how Japanese support for the 360 is currently so pitiful. But it makes sense. Why would Japanese gamers buy a console that doesn't have the type of games that they like? But once you bring in those titles, then that changes things.
There's been a lot of real bad-looking games on the 360. The problem isn't that the hardware is bad or even that there's something wrong with the engines: it's that everyone is making ugly games. Take, for example, saint's row: it's good at drawing lots of shiny objects with very many polygons and shadows, at high resolution even. But the artwork is bland, completely devoid of charm and magic (well, a game like that could probably use more grit than anything, but it doesn't even have that - compare to the atmosphere of, say, Max Payne). Ditto for Dead Rising and Perfect Dark.
While I agree that the look for Perfect Dark was awful ("Look ma! Everything is SHINY!"), I actually liked the atmosphere in Dead Rising and Saint's Row, but maybe that's just me. No doubt, there's still a lot of uncanny valley happening with the characters, but the environments themselves were fine. If you played Saint's Row, you actually get the feeling that it ISN'T supposed to be a really gritty, dark game. There's a lot of humor in there, so the "non-gritty" look fits. Versus Dead Rising which is the complete opposite, since it's a horror game.
But more importantly, I thought both games were a lot of fun because of the gameplay, despite whatever graphical issues they had. That's ultimately the most important factor.:)
The reason everyone has a boner for that PS3 demo is not that it's really doing anything technically that the 360 couldn't probably pull off, it's that the animation is fluid, the environment is beautifully designed, it just has good aesthetic sense.
I wouldn't say that PS3 titles look that much better. Maybe it's just me, but I still see a lot of uncanny valley issues with games on both platforms. The problem is the graphics capability of both have grown tremendously, so that's close to photorealism at times. But it's off by just enough to be really creepy. Just take a look at movement, or eyes. (And BTW, make sure you don't get fooled by pre-rendered cinematics, for both the PS3 or 360)
But as artists and designers get better at responding to the uncanny valley issue, the games will start to look better. The Mass Effect trailer for the 360 looked pretty good. They spent a lot of time on facial expressions, especially the eyes, so that it doesn't look nearly as creepy as, say, Oblivion. It also helps that there are a lot of "alien" characters in that game, as well as humans in bulky armor, etc.
In the meantime, the Wii gets to benefit with characters that are just on the left of uncanny valley, so they're quite familiar and approachable. The best example is Mario, which looks very "kiddy", but is much more aesthetically pleasing than, say, any human model in Oblivion. Okami, for the PS2, is another great example, since it's cel-shaded goodness. Not realistic, but very artistic and gorgeous. (And there are games with similar styles coming out for the 360 and PS3 as well)
Okami is certainly very pretty. I do wish more games went for that style of look (cell-shaded goodness, etc.). I did see one game for the 360 that looked pretty promising though: Eternal Sonata. (It's also called Trusty Bell: Chopin's Dreams in Japan, and is releasing there first) When I first saw the trailer for that game, Okami definately came to mind.
Of course, it'll be a few months (if not a year) before we find out how that game actually turns out to be as good as Okami is.
Also, there IS an "Okami-lookalike" for the PS3, called White Knight. Again, though, it'll be a while before that releases and we see how good that game really is. (And it's probably the only PS3 title, aside from FFXIII that I'm remotely interested in)
That said, I don't think one game alone can "screw over" a console. It's not true for either Okami or Gears of War. I think what's important is the trend of the types of games for a console. Xbox got essentially labelled as a console for mostly shooters, western RPGs (like KOTOR and the TES series), and multiplatform games. And I'd have to agree with that sentiment. Meanwhile, the PS2, being the 800lb gorilla, got everything... from your standard action/shooter/sports fare, to more "highbrow" games, such as Shadow of the Colossus and Okami. The 360 is starting to look a lot more diverse, which is good, but it certainly has a lot of ground to catch up.
As consoles get more and more powerful, and run hotter and hotter in general (except for the Wii), things like proper placement are becoming concerns for even your non-technical gamer. With all the attention that the 360 got last year, with people putting their consoles in stupid locations, Sony will benefit from the fact that there are more console owners aware that they need to be putting their expensive systems in the right places, lest they want to own a smoking brick in a month or two.
If there weren't such a huge recall of Sony batteries over the last few months, then a news item like this probably wouldn't have affected Sony's stock all that much. But I imagine analysts are worried now about the general quality of Sony products.
I actually feel the same way you do. I got the Xbox as a gift from my wife, but I played far more games on my PS2 than the Xbox. I should also let you know that I am supposedly biased for MS (see my profile, *grin*).
A lot of it has to do with the fact that I'm a huge fan of RPGs, particularly Japanese-style RPGs. With games like Disgaea, all the Xenosaga titles, and all the Final Fantasy games (just for starters) on the PS2, it's a no brainer which console I played more.
Despite that, though, I've been pleasantly surprised by the games on the 360 so far. While I didn't like previous Elder Scrolls games, I enjoyed Oblivion quite a bit. Thanks to the "evil" Live Marketplace, I downloaded two demos for Dead Rising and Saint's Row, and ended up buying them since they were so much fun. And they're quite excellent games. And then there's a ton of Live Arcade titles I've enjoyed as well. (I am eagerly awaiting Contra and Castlevania: Symphony of the Night).
What's most exciting is seeing some of the lineup that's coming up. Sure, there's Lost Planet and Gears of War, your typical action-type games (and not your normal FPS shooter!). And Bioshock has gotten rave reviews. But for this fan of J-RPGs, it's great to see games like Blue Dragon, Lost Oddysey, and Eternal Sonata. I can already say that there will be FAR more games I play on my 360 than on my Xbox. (And FYI, since you're a Gundam fan, there's also a Gundam game from Bandai coming to the 360)
Will I get a PS3? Certainly, since I'm still a sucker for almost anything Square-Enix (and they're also making a 360 game, called Project Slypheed, which looks pretty slick). But FFXIII isn't going to come out for at least a year, and none of the PS3 launch titles look remotely interesting. So after I beat Okami and FFXII, I plan on finally unplugging my PS2 and totally focusing on 360 titles. I can say without a doubt that my experience so far has been far beyond the "slim pickins" of the Xbox.
Now, I don't know if I'm a-typical because I'm supposedly biased (I try not to be a fanboi for anyone though), or if it's genuine interest. We'll find out in a few months, though, if I'm really alone or if there are others thinking the same way.
Oblivion? Um yeah, Bethesda totally didn't support the Xbox. And Bioshock is super different from the type of games the Xbox gets already (not really). As for the Japanesse developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot". Compared to the Xbox, maybe, but not compared to other systems.
I have a feeling that you're trolling, but I'll bite.
Bethesda is supporting MS and the Xbox. Morrowind came out for the Xbox first, and never came to any other console (although it did come out for PC. As we all know, Oblivion debuted initially on the 360 and the PC. True, it's going to be a PS3 launch title port, but I don't see how you can call that "not supporting the Xbox". Does that mean Rockstar is no longer supporting Sony, because GTA IV will be coming out to the 360 at the same time as the PS3 version?
As for Japanese developers, the number is certainly growing. Namco, makers of the Xenosaga series, is working on a 360 RPG called Eternal Sonata. From Software (published by Ubisoft), just released Enchanted Arms recently (which I'm playing through, and it's decent so far). And the big news is that Mistwalker Studios is making a number of exclusive titles for the 360, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddysey. And then you've got all your traditional Japanese developers (Capcom, Konami, and even Square-Enix) with a slew of other titles, although they're not RPGs.
Compared to the PS2, of course it's still quite small... although that's really the 800lb gorilla of the industry. I actually agree with you in that the support isn't quite "a lot", but you can't dispute that it's grown tremendously. Compared to Nintendo, it might be a little bit less, if not even on-par, seeing how they had problems getting 3rd party support with the GC. (Although that should hopefully change with the Wii)
The biggest beef that I have is that the support coming in might be too late. If Blue Dragon was a 360 launch title in Japan, then you'd certainly have many more system owners than the pitiful number now. It'll be interesting, though, to see how the "re-launch" of the 360 with BD this holiday season does.
My gut feel is that there will be a lot of disgruntled wanna-be PS3 owners, who didn't get a chance to buy the console. (Remember, it is in EXTREMELY short supply, especially in Japan) Many of them will opt for a Wii, although there are probably a number of Sakaguchi fans that will opt for a 360 just to check out his latest creation. (FYI, Sakaguchi = creator of Final Fantasy, head of Mistwalker Studios)
There are plenty of ways you can interact with other humans. You can talk, touch, build things together, make love, share experiences, etc. Of all the things you can do, hitting them with a stick/shooting them with a gun is perhaps not the most highbrow and fulfilling, but it seem to be the one most simulated in computer games.
There are a ton of games with all the things you suggested (well, except the "make love" part, good luck getting through the ESRB with that), especially in many RPGs. By the end of some RPGs, I feel a lot more connected to the characters and their story/plight/etc. than I do with many other characters on numerous TV shows and movies. It makes sense, since you can spend up to 50 game hours (and more!) with them, versus say only 2 hours with a movie character. (And that explains why there are so many people attached to video game characters, to the extend they will cosplay them, or write tons of fan fiction)
In that game, is a lot of talking and touching, sharing of experiences, and building of things (either physical or metaphysical). But in doing so, there's also a lot of the "running around" or "whacking something", because that's just the nature of a game. To get from A to B, you have to do X. With traditional medium, that X is generally passive. You just watch it unfold, or have to spend time reading.
The original author seems to suggest that having X be anything active, automatically dumbs down the experience and prevents it from being high-brow. I don't agree with that.
I'd have to say that I agree with much of his article. Most of the titles and genres that people suggested are games I would agree aren't highbrow. But I think some games like Ico and Shadow of the Colossus sure come close. Yet, the author disagrees because it includes gameplay...
From the article:
Games that were visually or thematically innovative. By far the most frequently mentioned games were Myst, ICO and Shadow of the Colossus. Other examples included Rez, American McGee's Alice, the Oddworld series, Grim Fandango and Bad Mojo (a third-person crawler; you play the role of a cockroach). I'm all for more of this, no question. Whether or not an innovative game is highbrow depends partially on the extent to which it avoids clichés of the medium. ICO was beautiful, unusual, and moving, but it still involved an awful lot of running, climbing, and whacking things with a stick.
That last sentence bothers me. Running, climbing, and "whacking things" is general requirement for many games. That's what makes it interactive entertainment. Is it a cliché of the medium? Sure, but frankly, there's a lot of clichés that even highbrow movies and literature have as well. You could argue there are always "wasted" and "throwaway" scenes and passages, although some may argue that those are just elements of the medium.
If anything Blu-ray would allow developers and artists to "be lazy" in a way. They wouldn't have to compress anything, could use ultra-large textures, and include everything under the sun, just because they could. It's yet to be seen, of course, how much of a benefit that is to the actual game.
I think the biggest benefit, though, is that the Blu-ray game could hold all international versions of a game. I'm talking about having all localized assets (voice, text, images with text, etc.), could be on one disc. That would save on cost. However, that also assumes the developer is able to release multiple localized versions of a game all at once, which is often hard to do.
So, nothing earth shattering I can think of. Sony can try to prove us wrong, but until then, let's remain skeptical.:)
I'm not convinced. I practically live on the Internet, the two times during the day where I'm not near a computer that's online is during lunch and when I sleep.
I've never heard this outside of MS or MS-sponsored channels. None of the people I work with (all tech enthusiasts) have mentioned it. None of the people I mail with have. Maybe it was short-lived, maybe you and I have different circles, maybe it's a US-only phenomenon - but there's no "movement" visible from over here.
Well, perhaps not a true Internet meme, but a gaming-oriented one. You might be a tech enthusiast, but are you a gaming one? Ever heard of the Leeroy Jenkins video, or "50 DKP minus"? Or seen the PS3 George Foreman grill photos?
If you're still in doubt, just head on over to the Penny Arcade forums, or surf around 1up.com, Joystiq, Kotaku and read the comments sometimes. Wii60 is certainly not an "MS sponsored" meme, especially considering Moore a few weeks ago tried to downplay his initial Wii60 comments.
I always see the claim of people running Linux on their consoles, be it a PS2 with the Linux kit, or a modded Xbox, or intend to with the PS3. Obviously you see this heavily with Slashdot commentators. Just curious, is something that you ACTUALLY do, or is it just a throwaway comment?
To me, running Linux on a console would be an interesting novelty, but that's it. I understand the cost-benefits in buying a "cheap" platform that's sold at a loss, but for practicality (ability to modify parts, troubleshoot hardware problems, etc.), I'd rather just get a cheap PC to use instead.
According to Wikipedia, the PS2 Linux kit was a poor seller, so something tells me that the claim of running Linux on a console really is just a throwaway comment after all...
Excuse me for being skeptical until you actually get some factual evidence to support this. I mean, maybe I'm crazy, but I have a suspicion that Nintendo's engineers and playtesters would have noted such a problem -- if it exists -- long before the system was shown to the public.
Obviously anyone who works for Nintendo is bound to an NDA, so they would not be able to talk about such a problem to the public. Now, if the problem doesn't exist at all, then this whole discussion is moot, and everyone will be happy. However, if the problem DOES exist, what will Nintendo do about it? Delay the Wii until they can completely analyze the problem, and make sure it never happens? Or try to mitigate it as much as possible (tell developers NOT to use the Wii-mote in certain ways), and perhaps buy some time and keep the console on track?
Anyone who's owned Nintendo's portables over the past few years, knows that the second option is what they tend to do. Who here remembers the awful lighting problems of the original GBA? *raises hand* Who here remembers the original, clunky DS? *raises hand* Also, who here traded in their original GBA and DS for the new & improved versions of each? *raises hand*
Frankly, I've been rather annoyed at Nintendo's track record when it comes to hardware. Yet, I can't stay away, so they're definately doing something right. I imagine it'll be the same with the Wii. I don't think Nintendo would improve the hardware, though, but rather find the "right way" for the Wii-mote to be used and learn from it.
Oh, and one last thing... I work in Redmond, so I happen to hear news regarding Nintendo of America every so often. A good friend of mine DID tell me that NOA playtesters are forced to take periodic breaks to rest themselves. Obviously, this is very much unconfirmed and a rumor, but still, it doesn't quite inspire confidence in me.:(
That said, I will still get a Wii. But I'm setting myself to be "pleasantly surprised", rather than enormously disappointed by the hype. I would suggest other Wii enthusiasts to do the same!
B) The farther away you are from the target, the more play you get from smaller gestures. From my standard sitting position away from my tv, I can make a complete line from side to side or from top to bottom on my (32") tv without ever taking my arm off the side of the recliner.
The problem with being farther away, though, is that it's harder to be precise. It's akin to cranking up the mouse sensitivity really high. Turning around in an FPS will be really easy, but sniping might be a lot harder.
Unfortunately, I've seen videos of Wii games which already appear to require some decent precision. Look up the video for Battalion Wars 2 for the Wii. I saw one area where you were essentially using the Wii-mote as if it were a mouse, and you used the cursor to select menu options and such. My hand starts cramping just at the thought of that. I really do hope it's not as bad as it seems like it'll be.
With the mouse, your hand is able to lay on top of it, so there's no strain in keeping it up. Yet, a lot of folks (myself included) do have RSI-like symptoms after using a mouse for a long time (especially a non-ergonomic one). So I definately am worried about games that require long bouts of precision.
Granted, I'm still quite interested in the console in general, and I think there are many other games and play modes that will make GOOD use of the Wii-mote. But there will most certainly be titles that don't use it correctly. It's the same way how many initial DS games were far too gimmicky, but definately got better as the console and its developers matured.
Like most things Microsoft, even this imaginary movement is total vaporware. Nobody outside of Peter's head has seen a "Wii-60 movement" so far.
You are wrong. Try doing a Google search for wii60, and you'll find plenty of homegrown enthusiasm for it. That's what Moore was referring to.
I believe this whole thing started shortly after E3 and the PS3 price announcement, when some clever posters in a gaming forum put two and two together and guessed that a Wii + 360 combo would be equivalent to a premium PS3. (It was a guess, because Wii pricing didn't come until much later) Lots of amusing photoshopped images ensued, and before you knew it, a new Internet meme was born.
You know, most PC games are still on CDs. And often only on one or two. With console games on DVDs, I've rarely run into a game that required more than one, and they were all RPGs where I went days (if not weeks) between actually needing to switch discs.
If we were still dealing with gobs of pre-rendered CG video, then you MIGHT need the extra space. But with consoles being a lot more powerful nowadays, most story scenes are rendered in real-time, which I usually prefer anyway. It's less "jarring" moving from game to cinematic. You also have the benefit of keeping the characters dressed/positioned however they were in the scene. (It's annoying when a game cuts to pre-rendered cinematic, and your characters are wearing something completely different from one scene to the next)
So, I really don't see this huge pressing need for HD-DVD or Blu-ray games. Sure, it's a "nice to have", but not worth paying an extra $100-200 for it. If I had to choose, I'd rather have the rich online features that Xbox Live provides, or have some cool, innovative control scheme, like what the Wii offers. Larger storage capacity for my games? I still need lots of convincing. The PS3 games that have been shown so far, hardly look better than 360 games.
<rant> You know, Sony would probably piss off a lot fewer people if they didn't blantantly lie or act like assholes, in regards to the PS3. It's the high-and-mighty attitude of you NEEDING the power of the Cell, of how the PS3 is actually REALLY CHEAP considering what's in it, and how only the PS3 offers TRUE HD. Blah blah blah.
All that they should have done is focus on the features people actually seem to care about, such as online functionality. I'm even fine with them pimping Blu-ray, but only for movies. And most importantly, focus on the games and all the exclusives that they often secure. That's the main reason why my PS2 was played far more than my Xbox (I'm a huge RPG fan). But all this system hype coming from Sony and their fanboys is seriously turning me off. </rant>
Actually, I have stopped anticipating the Wii launch for a couple of weeks now. I am well aware that I can't really wave my arm for hours to play, and just doing flicks of a wrist doesn't seem fun to me. So I've stopped caring about the Wii. So what's the point with that controller? I think Nintendo is in for a very nasty surprise.
I think it's good to be skeptical. One other thing that bugs me is that some games (Battalion Wars comes to mind) are treating the Wii-mote interface much like a mouse. You're expected to move the cursor and manipulate it accurately, to select menu options and such. That... looks... painful. Imagine trying to use a laser pointer to *carefully* manipulate on a far-away screen. My hand cramps up just thinking about it.
That said, I'm still excited about the whole concept. There will undoubtedly be a lot of initial hiccups, especially as developers figure out the right usage for the Wii-mote. But I am hoping that, like DS games, things will get much better.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the same thing folks threw out with the 360 launch. They couldn't imagine that people would actually be willing to buy the console, so there MUST have been an artificial shortage
It's going to be the same with the PS3, but worse. The production of brand new hardware always has wrinkles in it, as well as general quality issues. Then there's also the news of a shortage of blue lasers, which is affecting high-def DVD manufacturers everywhere.
Despite all the (seemingly unending) bad news about Sony, there are still going to be legions of fanbois clamoring for a console come launch day. And there will undoubtedly be a lot of entrepreneurs hoping to snag a PS3 or two (or a dozen), so they can resell them on eBay for big bucks. Anyone remember the awful rumors of GameStop employees hiding 360 boxes in the backroom, so that they could sell them for a huge profit later? Expect a repeat of that again this year.
All in all, a shortage is not a good thing for a console manufacturer, even for one that is sold at a loss. The sooner you get the platform in people's hands, the sooner they can start buying games and high-def movies. Sony's already has mind-share and buzz, even though it's not all positive. It doesn't need anymore negative news of parents and gamers complaining that they can't get a console and are looking to spend their $500-600 elsewhere (Wii or 360).
The wonderful thing about TV and especially the introduction of cable, is that there's a lot more variety now. Funny thing how most of the shows you mentioned, I don't care about at all. (I've had my fill of cop shows, thankyouvermuch)
As for Desperate Housewives, it's something my wife started watching when there was a lot of attention to it last year. I naturally caught some episodes in the background, and have to admit that it's quite the comedy at times. And yes, it's very much like your typical soap opera, only much better for some unquantifiable reason. I suspect there might a lot of other husbands, like me, that got sucked into the show and don't want to admit it. (Or maybe I'm just strange)
Stupid > tag ..
My wife made an excellent observation the other day. Anyone else notice that TV shows seem to be far better than the movies that have come out recently? Last year, ABC's Lost and Desperate Housewives dazzled many viewers (ourselves included). This year, I've been really impressed by NBC's Heroes and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. The writing has been quite good, although some may argue that it does degrade over time. Not to mention lots of the great shows on HBO, Showtime, and some of the excellent comedies that have come and gone (Arrested Development comes to mind). And keep in mind that most of these are original shows. TV is in a far better situation than it used to be just a few years ago, when everything had to be a "reality TV show".
This is in comparison to movies, where it seems like everything is a sequel nowadays, or some book->movie or TV->movie or game->movie port.
Why do we like sequels and franchises so much? It's the content, stupid!
Sometimes its because we really enjoy the story and characters, and want to see it continue (see the Halo, Metal Gear Solid games, among many others). Often it's because we really like that particular brand of gameplay, whether it be sports (see Madden) or a brawler (see Smash Bros), or kart racing (see Mario Kart). And often its because we really like the way a particular developer makes a game (see Final Fantasy or Grand Theft Auto, by Square-Enix and Rockstar respectively).
I think a great example of this is with the ever popular Final Fantasy VII game. It was the first "FF" game for many folks, thanks to a huge advertising campaign by Square at the time. So, for all future FF games, FF7 has always been "the one" for these fanatics.
As someone who's played the FF games from the beginning, I never understood what the craze was about. FF7 is actually the only FF game I never played (I don't count the MMO FFXI), since it took a long time for me to jump to the PS1. And when I did have a chance to try it, I never got close to completing it, as there were far better RPGs around at the time. For me? The earlier FF games had a lot of charm, so for me, those are the ones I enjoyed the most. Very much an emotional response though.
I made the mistake of getting my PS2 used from a friend. (He wanted to get an import PS2 instead, so he could play Japanese games ... I guess he didn't want to mod his PS2)
My PS2 still works, but its definately had its quirky moments. For the longest time, it would only work when it was vertical. I also have some older PS2 games that have just stopped working for the system at all. Very annoying. I heard a lot about PS2 class-action suits and returns, but since I got it used, I knew I could never participate in them.
My Xbox has its fair share of issues as well, with "dirty disc errors" popping up from time to time. However, it still most games fine, and all games with a tiny bit of patience. I also have a launch day 360, and apparently I've been lucky as I've had no problems with it. (I hope I haven't jinxed myself now)
I know a lot of people talked about it when Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within came out. I don't think they used the actual term "uncanny valley", but I had a lot of friends talk about how creepy the movie looked at times. In still-shots, or general action scenes, the movie looked fine. But the more personal and emotional moments, definately felt creepy at times to me and my friends. I still enjoyed the movie, for the most part, so it didn't detract TOO much, but it was certainly there.
Notice how other CG movies like Toy Story or even The Incredibles don't have this problem whatsoever, since the characters are so "cartoony" looking. And in other movies that use CG characters, they're often relegated to non-humans (such as Aslan from The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and Gollum from The Lord of the Rings). IMHO, I think it'll be a while before we have a movie like FF: Spirits Within, where the entire cast is CG yet photo-realistic.
My original subject was "RPG support on 360 steadily getting better". I was comparing it to the last Xbox generation. Go to GameSpot and browse for all the Xbox RPGs and sort them by release date. You'll see that support was pitiful. First RPG for the system was Morrowind, which came out over 6 months since the Xbox first came out. The next notable RPG for the system, which was Knights of the Old Republic, didn't come out till a YEAR LATER. You'll also see a distinct lack of J-RPGs of any kind. Phantasy Star Online only sort of counts, since it was a port (came out for the Dreamcast and GameCube). There are a couple of notable RPGs that came on the scene later, such as Fable and Jade Empire, but they didn't come out till far later (2004, even 2005). And they're western-style RPGs. So, if I had to summarize, Japanese RPG support on the Xbox was pretty much close to zero.
The 4 Japanese RPGs I mentioned for the 360 is a huge increase percentage-wise, obviously. And I didn't mention the western-style RPGs coming out for the system, since that wasn't my point (you can Google if you want to read more about them). (I also forgot to mention FFXI, but that shouldn't count since it's also a port, much like PSO was) Maybe you got confused, I'm not trying to compare J-RPG support from the 360 to the PS2, and say that's even remotely close. That'd be obviously stupid.
Well, I was just speculating. I assumed that you did some research on the topic, or had some more knowledge of the industry, but apparently you haven't. So here I go.
Sakaguchi is a big deal. Here's the Wikipedia link for Sakaguchi-san. He's got a pretty impressive list of games there. Now, his latest creation, Blue Dragon, sports a couple of other big names. Ever heard of Akira Toriyama? He was responsible for developing the mega-popular Dragon Ball manga and anime. He's also the character designer for the extremely popular Dragon Quest series, as well as the cult-classic Chrono Trigger. Now, if that weren't enough, doing the music for the game is the ever popular Nobuo Uematsu. He did the music for many of the Final Fantasy games, as well as Chrono Trigger.
As you can imagine, all these guys have lots of fans. At the recent Tokyo Game Show, there were long lines for 360 RPGs. That actually surprised me at first, seeing how Japanese support for the 360 is currently so pitiful. But it makes sense. Why would Japanese gamers buy a console that doesn't have the type of games that they like? But once you bring in those titles, then that changes things.
Now, obviously big
While I agree that the look for Perfect Dark was awful ("Look ma! Everything is SHINY!"), I actually liked the atmosphere in Dead Rising and Saint's Row, but maybe that's just me. No doubt, there's still a lot of uncanny valley happening with the characters, but the environments themselves were fine. If you played Saint's Row, you actually get the feeling that it ISN'T supposed to be a really gritty, dark game. There's a lot of humor in there, so the "non-gritty" look fits. Versus Dead Rising which is the complete opposite, since it's a horror game.
But more importantly, I thought both games were a lot of fun because of the gameplay, despite whatever graphical issues they had. That's ultimately the most important factor.
I wouldn't say that PS3 titles look that much better. Maybe it's just me, but I still see a lot of uncanny valley issues with games on both platforms. The problem is the graphics capability of both have grown tremendously, so that's close to photorealism at times. But it's off by just enough to be really creepy. Just take a look at movement, or eyes. (And BTW, make sure you don't get fooled by pre-rendered cinematics, for both the PS3 or 360)
But as artists and designers get better at responding to the uncanny valley issue, the games will start to look better. The Mass Effect trailer for the 360 looked pretty good. They spent a lot of time on facial expressions, especially the eyes, so that it doesn't look nearly as creepy as, say, Oblivion. It also helps that there are a lot of "alien" characters in that game, as well as humans in bulky armor, etc.
In the meantime, the Wii gets to benefit with characters that are just on the left of uncanny valley, so they're quite familiar and approachable. The best example is Mario, which looks very "kiddy", but is much more aesthetically pleasing than, say, any human model in Oblivion. Okami, for the PS2, is another great example, since it's cel-shaded goodness. Not realistic, but very artistic and gorgeous. (And there are games with similar styles coming out for the 360 and PS3 as well)
Okami is certainly very pretty. I do wish more games went for that style of look (cell-shaded goodness, etc.). I did see one game for the 360 that looked pretty promising though: Eternal Sonata. (It's also called Trusty Bell: Chopin's Dreams in Japan, and is releasing there first) When I first saw the trailer for that game, Okami definately came to mind.
... from your standard action/shooter/sports fare, to more "highbrow" games, such as Shadow of the Colossus and Okami. The 360 is starting to look a lot more diverse, which is good, but it certainly has a lot of ground to catch up.
Of course, it'll be a few months (if not a year) before we find out how that game actually turns out to be as good as Okami is.
Also, there IS an "Okami-lookalike" for the PS3, called White Knight. Again, though, it'll be a while before that releases and we see how good that game really is. (And it's probably the only PS3 title, aside from FFXIII that I'm remotely interested in)
That said, I don't think one game alone can "screw over" a console. It's not true for either Okami or Gears of War. I think what's important is the trend of the types of games for a console. Xbox got essentially labelled as a console for mostly shooters, western RPGs (like KOTOR and the TES series), and multiplatform games. And I'd have to agree with that sentiment. Meanwhile, the PS2, being the 800lb gorilla, got everything
As consoles get more and more powerful, and run hotter and hotter in general (except for the Wii), things like proper placement are becoming concerns for even your non-technical gamer. With all the attention that the 360 got last year, with people putting their consoles in stupid locations, Sony will benefit from the fact that there are more console owners aware that they need to be putting their expensive systems in the right places, lest they want to own a smoking brick in a month or two.
If there weren't such a huge recall of Sony batteries over the last few months, then a news item like this probably wouldn't have affected Sony's stock all that much. But I imagine analysts are worried now about the general quality of Sony products.
I actually feel the same way you do. I got the Xbox as a gift from my wife, but I played far more games on my PS2 than the Xbox. I should also let you know that I am supposedly biased for MS (see my profile, *grin*).
A lot of it has to do with the fact that I'm a huge fan of RPGs, particularly Japanese-style RPGs. With games like Disgaea, all the Xenosaga titles, and all the Final Fantasy games (just for starters) on the PS2, it's a no brainer which console I played more.
Despite that, though, I've been pleasantly surprised by the games on the 360 so far. While I didn't like previous Elder Scrolls games, I enjoyed Oblivion quite a bit. Thanks to the "evil" Live Marketplace, I downloaded two demos for Dead Rising and Saint's Row, and ended up buying them since they were so much fun. And they're quite excellent games. And then there's a ton of Live Arcade titles I've enjoyed as well. (I am eagerly awaiting Contra and Castlevania: Symphony of the Night).
What's most exciting is seeing some of the lineup that's coming up. Sure, there's Lost Planet and Gears of War, your typical action-type games (and not your normal FPS shooter!). And Bioshock has gotten rave reviews. But for this fan of J-RPGs, it's great to see games like Blue Dragon, Lost Oddysey, and Eternal Sonata. I can already say that there will be FAR more games I play on my 360 than on my Xbox. (And FYI, since you're a Gundam fan, there's also a Gundam game from Bandai coming to the 360)
Will I get a PS3? Certainly, since I'm still a sucker for almost anything Square-Enix (and they're also making a 360 game, called Project Slypheed, which looks pretty slick). But FFXIII isn't going to come out for at least a year, and none of the PS3 launch titles look remotely interesting. So after I beat Okami and FFXII, I plan on finally unplugging my PS2 and totally focusing on 360 titles. I can say without a doubt that my experience so far has been far beyond the "slim pickins" of the Xbox.
Now, I don't know if I'm a-typical because I'm supposedly biased (I try not to be a fanboi for anyone though), or if it's genuine interest. We'll find out in a few months, though, if I'm really alone or if there are others thinking the same way.
Oblivion? Um yeah, Bethesda totally didn't support the Xbox. And Bioshock is super different from the type of games the Xbox gets already (not really). As for the Japanesse developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot". Compared to the Xbox, maybe, but not compared to other systems.
... although that's really the 800lb gorilla of the industry. I actually agree with you in that the support isn't quite "a lot", but you can't dispute that it's grown tremendously. Compared to Nintendo, it might be a little bit less, if not even on-par, seeing how they had problems getting 3rd party support with the GC. (Although that should hopefully change with the Wii)
I have a feeling that you're trolling, but I'll bite.
Bethesda is supporting MS and the Xbox. Morrowind came out for the Xbox first, and never came to any other console (although it did come out for PC. As we all know, Oblivion debuted initially on the 360 and the PC. True, it's going to be a PS3 launch title port, but I don't see how you can call that "not supporting the Xbox". Does that mean Rockstar is no longer supporting Sony, because GTA IV will be coming out to the 360 at the same time as the PS3 version?
As for Japanese developers, the number is certainly growing. Namco, makers of the Xenosaga series, is working on a 360 RPG called Eternal Sonata. From Software (published by Ubisoft), just released Enchanted Arms recently (which I'm playing through, and it's decent so far). And the big news is that Mistwalker Studios is making a number of exclusive titles for the 360, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddysey. And then you've got all your traditional Japanese developers (Capcom, Konami, and even Square-Enix) with a slew of other titles, although they're not RPGs.
Compared to the PS2, of course it's still quite small
The biggest beef that I have is that the support coming in might be too late. If Blue Dragon was a 360 launch title in Japan, then you'd certainly have many more system owners than the pitiful number now. It'll be interesting, though, to see how the "re-launch" of the 360 with BD this holiday season does.
My gut feel is that there will be a lot of disgruntled wanna-be PS3 owners, who didn't get a chance to buy the console. (Remember, it is in EXTREMELY short supply, especially in Japan) Many of them will opt for a Wii, although there are probably a number of Sakaguchi fans that will opt for a 360 just to check out his latest creation. (FYI, Sakaguchi = creator of Final Fantasy, head of Mistwalker Studios)
There are a ton of games with all the things you suggested (well, except the "make love" part, good luck getting through the ESRB with that), especially in many RPGs. By the end of some RPGs, I feel a lot more connected to the characters and their story/plight/etc. than I do with many other characters on numerous TV shows and movies. It makes sense, since you can spend up to 50 game hours (and more!) with them, versus say only 2 hours with a movie character. (And that explains why there are so many people attached to video game characters, to the extend they will cosplay them, or write tons of fan fiction)
In that game, is a lot of talking and touching, sharing of experiences, and building of things (either physical or metaphysical). But in doing so, there's also a lot of the "running around" or "whacking something", because that's just the nature of a game. To get from A to B, you have to do X. With traditional medium, that X is generally passive. You just watch it unfold, or have to spend time reading.
The original author seems to suggest that having X be anything active, automatically dumbs down the experience and prevents it from being high-brow. I don't agree with that.
From the article:
That last sentence bothers me. Running, climbing, and "whacking things" is general requirement for many games. That's what makes it interactive entertainment. Is it a cliché of the medium? Sure, but frankly, there's a lot of clichés that even highbrow movies and literature have as well. You could argue there are always "wasted" and "throwaway" scenes and passages, although some may argue that those are just elements of the medium.
If anything Blu-ray would allow developers and artists to "be lazy" in a way. They wouldn't have to compress anything, could use ultra-large textures, and include everything under the sun, just because they could. It's yet to be seen, of course, how much of a benefit that is to the actual game.
:)
I think the biggest benefit, though, is that the Blu-ray game could hold all international versions of a game. I'm talking about having all localized assets (voice, text, images with text, etc.), could be on one disc. That would save on cost. However, that also assumes the developer is able to release multiple localized versions of a game all at once, which is often hard to do.
So, nothing earth shattering I can think of. Sony can try to prove us wrong, but until then, let's remain skeptical.
Well, perhaps not a true Internet meme, but a gaming-oriented one. You might be a tech enthusiast, but are you a gaming one? Ever heard of the Leeroy Jenkins video, or "50 DKP minus"? Or seen the PS3 George Foreman grill photos?
If you're still in doubt, just head on over to the Penny Arcade forums, or surf around 1up.com, Joystiq, Kotaku and read the comments sometimes. Wii60 is certainly not an "MS sponsored" meme, especially considering Moore a few weeks ago tried to downplay his initial Wii60 comments.
I always see the claim of people running Linux on their consoles, be it a PS2 with the Linux kit, or a modded Xbox, or intend to with the PS3. Obviously you see this heavily with Slashdot commentators. Just curious, is something that you ACTUALLY do, or is it just a throwaway comment?
...
To me, running Linux on a console would be an interesting novelty, but that's it. I understand the cost-benefits in buying a "cheap" platform that's sold at a loss, but for practicality (ability to modify parts, troubleshoot hardware problems, etc.), I'd rather just get a cheap PC to use instead.
According to Wikipedia, the PS2 Linux kit was a poor seller, so something tells me that the claim of running Linux on a console really is just a throwaway comment after all
Obviously anyone who works for Nintendo is bound to an NDA, so they would not be able to talk about such a problem to the public. Now, if the problem doesn't exist at all, then this whole discussion is moot, and everyone will be happy. However, if the problem DOES exist, what will Nintendo do about it? Delay the Wii until they can completely analyze the problem, and make sure it never happens? Or try to mitigate it as much as possible (tell developers NOT to use the Wii-mote in certain ways), and perhaps buy some time and keep the console on track?
Anyone who's owned Nintendo's portables over the past few years, knows that the second option is what they tend to do. Who here remembers the awful lighting problems of the original GBA? *raises hand* Who here remembers the original, clunky DS? *raises hand* Also, who here traded in their original GBA and DS for the new & improved versions of each? *raises hand*
Frankly, I've been rather annoyed at Nintendo's track record when it comes to hardware. Yet, I can't stay away, so they're definately doing something right. I imagine it'll be the same with the Wii. I don't think Nintendo would improve the hardware, though, but rather find the "right way" for the Wii-mote to be used and learn from it.
Oh, and one last thing
That said, I will still get a Wii. But I'm setting myself to be "pleasantly surprised", rather than enormously disappointed by the hype. I would suggest other Wii enthusiasts to do the same!
The problem with being farther away, though, is that it's harder to be precise. It's akin to cranking up the mouse sensitivity really high. Turning around in an FPS will be really easy, but sniping might be a lot harder.
Unfortunately, I've seen videos of Wii games which already appear to require some decent precision. Look up the video for Battalion Wars 2 for the Wii. I saw one area where you were essentially using the Wii-mote as if it were a mouse, and you used the cursor to select menu options and such. My hand starts cramping just at the thought of that. I really do hope it's not as bad as it seems like it'll be.
With the mouse, your hand is able to lay on top of it, so there's no strain in keeping it up. Yet, a lot of folks (myself included) do have RSI-like symptoms after using a mouse for a long time (especially a non-ergonomic one). So I definately am worried about games that require long bouts of precision.
Granted, I'm still quite interested in the console in general, and I think there are many other games and play modes that will make GOOD use of the Wii-mote. But there will most certainly be titles that don't use it correctly. It's the same way how many initial DS games were far too gimmicky, but definately got better as the console and its developers matured.
You are wrong. Try doing a Google search for wii60, and you'll find plenty of homegrown enthusiasm for it. That's what Moore was referring to.
I believe this whole thing started shortly after E3 and the PS3 price announcement, when some clever posters in a gaming forum put two and two together and guessed that a Wii + 360 combo would be equivalent to a premium PS3. (It was a guess, because Wii pricing didn't come until much later) Lots of amusing photoshopped images ensued, and before you knew it, a new Internet meme was born.
You know, most PC games are still on CDs. And often only on one or two. With console games on DVDs, I've rarely run into a game that required more than one, and they were all RPGs where I went days (if not weeks) between actually needing to switch discs.
If we were still dealing with gobs of pre-rendered CG video, then you MIGHT need the extra space. But with consoles being a lot more powerful nowadays, most story scenes are rendered in real-time, which I usually prefer anyway. It's less "jarring" moving from game to cinematic. You also have the benefit of keeping the characters dressed/positioned however they were in the scene. (It's annoying when a game cuts to pre-rendered cinematic, and your characters are wearing something completely different from one scene to the next)
So, I really don't see this huge pressing need for HD-DVD or Blu-ray games. Sure, it's a "nice to have", but not worth paying an extra $100-200 for it. If I had to choose, I'd rather have the rich online features that Xbox Live provides, or have some cool, innovative control scheme, like what the Wii offers. Larger storage capacity for my games? I still need lots of convincing. The PS3 games that have been shown so far, hardly look better than 360 games.
<rant>
You know, Sony would probably piss off a lot fewer people if they didn't blantantly lie or act like assholes, in regards to the PS3. It's the high-and-mighty attitude of you NEEDING the power of the Cell, of how the PS3 is actually REALLY CHEAP considering what's in it, and how only the PS3 offers TRUE HD. Blah blah blah.
All that they should have done is focus on the features people actually seem to care about, such as online functionality. I'm even fine with them pimping Blu-ray, but only for movies. And most importantly, focus on the games and all the exclusives that they often secure. That's the main reason why my PS2 was played far more than my Xbox (I'm a huge RPG fan). But all this system hype coming from Sony and their fanboys is seriously turning me off.
</rant>
I think it's good to be skeptical. One other thing that bugs me is that some games (Battalion Wars comes to mind) are treating the Wii-mote interface much like a mouse. You're expected to move the cursor and manipulate it accurately, to select menu options and such. That
That said, I'm still excited about the whole concept. There will undoubtedly be a lot of initial hiccups, especially as developers figure out the right usage for the Wii-mote. But I am hoping that, like DS games, things will get much better.