Yeah but eh. It's not really that big a deal. Saving direct would be nice---and there should have been a unified storage API so that any game can use any unit---but it's still really not that big a deal. One card easily holds enough for probably 20 games with two exceptions: Drakengard, which had ridiculously large saves (1.4MB) and FFX, where you could use about 4MB and 75 save spots if you wanted to have a collection of every spot in the game.
Not that I'm hoping they overlook it in the PS3. If/when I plug in the HDD, it better be there. Of greater concern on the PS2 is the number of games which can't even read the memory card from slot B. That is annoying.
The thing that has me most excited about this as a FPS is that it's about shooting. I really love the FPS sequences in, say, Jak3, where you're focusing on the thing it's about: shooting. Not ammo, not finding keys, not running down hallways. See targets, shoot targets.
I'm hoping it's the same thing with Black. No ammo, shoot everything. (Actually, Project: Snowblind seems to be like this, minus all the nifty environmental stuff in Black. I haven't played very far yet though.)
What I hope it's not is another Red Faction: nice wall damage in most places for the first level or so, then it's a gimmick that doesn't really matter.
The PS2 HDD was only $99. Actually, it was more like $50, because it came with FFXI, which would have easily gone for $50 otherwise. (Actually, given it came with the first expansion pack by default, it'd be more like $39.99+$39.99.) In any case, it wasn't that much, and you can get them now for like $60 at Frys. Still with FFXI. (Which includes a free month of play, which is more than enough time to get addicted.)
Yes, you can easily transfer saved games to the HDD; both PS1 and PS2 games, in fact. While I don't play FFXI regularly at the moment due to time constraint, I still consider the HDD worth it for this if nothing else.
There was supposed to be an earth-shattering BOOM!
Seriously, when does the "SCO goes down in flames" lightshow begin? How long has it been? And where can I buy front-row seats for the trial where IBM and the judge smacks them around?
I have no dead pixels on my first PSP. I was pleasantly suprised given everyone whining incessantly about them.
On my second PSP, I have probably 4 or 5 always-on pixels. I considered (briefly) exchanging it until I realized the only time I could even tell they were there was on the initial bootup screen where it's all black. Otherwise I haven't been able to tell they're there.
All you DS whiners also have to realize that dead pixels on the DS are significantly worse than dead pixels on the PSP. The PSP's resolution is 480x272, vs the DS which is 256x192. The DS thus has significantly larger and more noticeable pixels.
I have to say that Sony craftsmanship is always good for a laugh.
This statement is laughable. The PSP is an amazingly sexy work of engineering. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind, hasn't seen one, or is in denial.
This follows Microsoft's new basic assertion that the computer and all its data belongs to Microsoft in the first place, therefore calling it "My Computer" is technically (and possibly legally) incorrect.
They were going to call it "Our Computer", but decided against it on the grounds that users might think they were sharing something, and didn't want there to be any confusion. Microsoft doesn't share anything.
(For the humorless: This is a joke. But it's funny because you know how close to the truth it is. Or maybe it's scary for the same reason.)
Indeed, there's simply no excuse. I'd like to point out exactly how reminiscent of Zelda 1---the very first and original Zelda, for those who can't count, or very likely were not born yet---Wind Waker's graphics are. Or everyone's favorite, Link to the Past.
If anything, Wind Waker hit it right on the head. The new "photorealistic" Zelda doesn't really appeal to me. Yes, it's shiny. So what?
Anyone who thinks the GP32 is in any way comparable to the PSP hasn't even seen a PSP in person.
Not to mention the GP32 has specs that are more comparable to the GBA, while the PSP has specs that are more comparable to a PS2.
This isn't to say I wouldn't mind having a GP32 for some emulation---although it only does 320x240, so no hi-res/overscan games like Secret of Mana---but when it comes down to it, the PSP just kicks ass.
Yes, definitely the end of Final Fantasy. You can tell because of the raging popularity. Other factors include all "Final Fantasy" titles being developed, such as the myriad of sidestories, minigames, and sequels to FFVII, in addition to the years of long development of FFXII.
Let's not forget FFXI of course which has its 3rd expansion pack under development, record subscription rate, and high popularity.
Not to mention promise of Final Fantasy on every major next-generation platform and handheld.
So doomed they're even making another movie, the way it should have been the first time.
Yes, I'd say Final Fantasy certainly has nothing going for it anymore.;-P
This is exactly my thought and has been for a long while. 3D modelling is at the "cave-painting" point on its timeline. It reminds me of old Atari games where entire levels would be predrawn bitmaps. Much like current 3D areas are entirely precreated models.
Very sad. When will people start building programs where they can say "ok, here's a model, detail it for me" and it'll throw in your imperfections, age the surface, and fill in details based on hinting and metadata.
Those are amazing. I wonder a bit at the placing order, but regardless... some of those are amazing.
I hear people complaining about how we don't need better video cards or whatever, how we can't possibly get any better or need any more power than what we've got.
To these people I say, come back when my Playstation produces graphics like this in realtime.
Is this supposed to be bad? Are we not encouraging parents to actually parent, by monitoring their children's activities, on, say, the internet, or what games they play? Why then would monitoring a major contributing factor to the physical health and well-being of the child be bad?
Perhaps this article, then, is not intended that way, and is placed under YRO for some other reason.
the dreamcast...even if you don't think the dreamcast was better (alot do, including me), then you can't say what the ps2 accomplished was very remarkable, because the dreamcast was out long before and it was at the very worst close to the same quality.
Depends. The Dreamcast had better deliverings initially, but it's unclear whether it could have kept up with the curve. The PS2 had (and still has to an extent) a lot of untapped potential that only showed up later due to development complexity; the Dreamcast pretty much had a standard devkit that took full advantage of the hardware right off. Now everyone seems to know how to use the PS2 a lot better; compare the in-game graphics of something like Shenmue (which looked good then) to something like MGS3, Jak3, or God of War, and you'll find PS2 surpasses.
Either way, it's irrelevant: Sega made it irrelevant. This is too bad, because I'd much rather see a race between Sony, Sega, and Nintendo than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
Here is an article where the chief financial officer of nVidia confirms that the supposedly "in-game" footage from the new PS3 is a load of cobblers
No, the specific quote from the article is "Burkett has commented that the visuals had been created on current nVidia hardware of roughly the same power as the RSX." That is, they don't have the RSX done, but they have hardware that's more or less equivalent to the specification in some form (maybe not on a single chip or card).
Sigh... it's the emotion engine/missile guidance systems all over again.
I hope so, because after some investigation, it appears Sony delivered on their promises.
For instance, one current myth is the FF8 tech demo was faked. Anyone who has played a modern PS2 game will not be impressed by those screenshots: the FFX engine was more impressive years ago (more colors, more textures, more geometry).
Another myth is Sony claiming that the PS2 can produce Toy Story level graphics. The original claim was the ability to render Toy Story in realtime, without shaders/T&L, and at a lower resolution. This is mostly a measure of the raw polycount the PS2 can push, not doing realtime Renderman in hardware. If you don't believe this, I suggest you go find a quote that claims anything more and is straight from the horse's mouth (a Sony press release or Sony spokesman). You won't. Everyone claiming anything else are either news media misunderstanding, or people in forums misquoting.
The PS2 has delivered quite a bit. Compare what it's been capable of over the past few years to what was available at the time (PS1, N64), and it was a pretty big leap. It's not hard to imagine people seeing original demos and overglamourizing, remembering things being a bit more than they were. We'll probably look at the PS3 demos someday and realize they're not all that great, when compared to the PS4 and other next-next-gen consoles. That's technological advance for you.
Give someone something unbelievable, and the first thing they'll do is not believe it.;-)
Actually the only thing I can hope is that someday, somewhere, someone will make a remake of I-III that are completely and utterly unlike the originals. Because then someone in the future can actually enjoy Star Wars again.
"Consumers wont pay 60 bucks for 1 disk. They want a bunch of disks so they think they're buying a bunch of stuff."
This hardly stops them even today. Look at most Anime discs and the like. You could easily fit the entire series on a single disc, but they split it up into 3-4 eps per disc (if you're lucky). Same with movies. Throw on a bunch of useless extras, use "high-definition" video to eat up lots of space, and release tons of editions.
Mostly, this is useful for pressing data. Large games, applications, etc. Really, DVDs are pathetically small and always have been: we should have been at 50-100G years ago.
Business execs can always come up with new ways to rip you off. (Besides, you think $20 isn't a ripoff? DVDs cost less than a penny to press and the box is cheap. Huge ridiculous profit margins.)
The Nintendo Revolution gets unveiled; it goes to the games.slashdot section page.
Hmm.
Anyhow, Nintendo pretty much let down anyone who was hoping for real information today.
And you wonder why it's not on the front page? I've been fairly hyped to see whatever Nintendo was doing after the PS3 excitement, but... it's all vapor so far. And only vague promises at that. Granted, "Nintendo handwaves vaguely" wouldn't be considerably worse than some slashdot stories, but really... Nintendo hasn't earned a front-page story yet.
The basic dual shock design has been around for a decade now. The original PS1 controller was given analog sticks and force feedback, and then with the PS2 upgraded with analog face buttons (which was an iffy addition, but works well for some games like MGS2/3). So it's not like they just make up something new ever generation.
The new stick is basically the dual shock 2 that's wireless and redesigned to scream "this is the new generation" to anyone who sees it. Unless there are some additional features we haven't heard about.
You may not like Microsoft, but they don't tend to make really stupid mistakes, and this would be one. It just ain't gonna happen.
Actually I don't like Microsoft, and they do tend to make really stupid mistakes from time to time. Ignoring the Internet for so long. Microsoft Bob. WebTV. Others I'm sure we can think of.
But I don't think they'll make this one, for all the reasons you mentioned, and possibly more: One, they're in denial. I think they believe they're superior in all ways, and unbeatable. Two, pride. "If you can't win 'em, join 'em", and they're not willing to admit they can't win, because they always have. Three, history: they never pick up on the latest technology until everyone else has, and they've still got a grip on the market.
The only real reason for any of those platforms now is as a collector's piece. For all intents and purposes, they're failed platforms. If I saw a Virtual Boy for sale (reasonably), I'd probably pick it up... not because I'd play it, but to collect a piece of Nintendo history, even if it was a darker moment.
The sales status of something doesn't matter to me... if it did, I'd hardly run Linux, or play various lesser RPGs (Everblue 2 rocks), etc. What does interest me is simply the games. XBOX never had any that were console sellers for me. Dreamcast games you can mostly get for other platforms now (Shenmue and Skies of Arcadia being the biggest, for me). Saturn technically had a few interesting games (Nights, Virtua Fighter), but far too expensive an investment.
Also, if you haven't been keeping up with your PS2 games, you've been missing a lot. Either that or you're a fan of a very limited scope of games (perhaps sports games?). Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but if you've missed stuff like GTA:SA, Jak3, Metal Gear Solid 3, Shin Megami Tensei (3 and DDS), Sly2, Phantom Brave, Ys6, GT4, God of War, you've missed out on quite a lot, even if there are a couple in that list that don't interest you for whatever reason (genre, violence, etc). There are some interesting B games here and there as well (I'm working on Obscure at the moment... kinda a Silent Hill Lite).
It's all about the games. The next generation will be an interesting thing to see, but currently, the XBOX 360 isn't looking much more enticing than the XBOX. Waiting to see what the PS3 and Revolution have to offer is definitely prudent, and likely to pay off as in previous generations.
First, if you work for someplace with an NDA, it covers any nondisclosure information unless they're totally incompetant... so even if you overheard someone while getting coffee, you're probably still breaking NDA. In fact, you could be breaking NDA even if it's not true.
Second, the revenue stream for a console is its games. Weak or no copy protection scares developers. The Xbox 360 will probably be sold at a huge loss, so there's no profit from just selling consoles. Is mindshare worth that much?
Third, even if you're telling the truth on both counts, I wouldn't be bragging about this. It makes the 360 reek even more of Dreamcast: out early, no protection, big hype... big flop.
Slashdot Mirror
Not that I'm hoping they overlook it in the PS3. If/when I plug in the HDD, it better be there. Of greater concern on the PS2 is the number of games which can't even read the memory card from slot B. That is annoying.
I'm hoping it's the same thing with Black. No ammo, shoot everything. (Actually, Project: Snowblind seems to be like this, minus all the nifty environmental stuff in Black. I haven't played very far yet though.)
What I hope it's not is another Red Faction: nice wall damage in most places for the first level or so, then it's a gimmick that doesn't really matter.
Yes, you can easily transfer saved games to the HDD; both PS1 and PS2 games, in fact. While I don't play FFXI regularly at the moment due to time constraint, I still consider the HDD worth it for this if nothing else.
There was supposed to be an earth-shattering BOOM!
Seriously, when does the "SCO goes down in flames" lightshow begin? How long has it been? And where can I buy front-row seats for the trial where IBM and the judge smacks them around?
On my second PSP, I have probably 4 or 5 always-on pixels. I considered (briefly) exchanging it until I realized the only time I could even tell they were there was on the initial bootup screen where it's all black. Otherwise I haven't been able to tell they're there.
All you DS whiners also have to realize that dead pixels on the DS are significantly worse than dead pixels on the PSP. The PSP's resolution is 480x272, vs the DS which is 256x192. The DS thus has significantly larger and more noticeable pixels.
This statement is laughable. The PSP is an amazingly sexy work of engineering. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind, hasn't seen one, or is in denial.
They were going to call it "Our Computer", but decided against it on the grounds that users might think they were sharing something, and didn't want there to be any confusion. Microsoft doesn't share anything.
(For the humorless: This is a joke. But it's funny because you know how close to the truth it is. Or maybe it's scary for the same reason.)
If anything, Wind Waker hit it right on the head. The new "photorealistic" Zelda doesn't really appeal to me. Yes, it's shiny. So what?
Not to mention the GP32 has specs that are more comparable to the GBA, while the PSP has specs that are more comparable to a PS2.
This isn't to say I wouldn't mind having a GP32 for some emulation---although it only does 320x240, so no hi-res/overscan games like Secret of Mana---but when it comes down to it, the PSP just kicks ass.
Let's not forget FFXI of course which has its 3rd expansion pack under development, record subscription rate, and high popularity.
Not to mention promise of Final Fantasy on every major next-generation platform and handheld.
So doomed they're even making another movie, the way it should have been the first time.
Yes, I'd say Final Fantasy certainly has nothing going for it anymore. ;-P
Very sad. When will people start building programs where they can say "ok, here's a model, detail it for me" and it'll throw in your imperfections, age the surface, and fill in details based on hinting and metadata.
I hear people complaining about how we don't need better video cards or whatever, how we can't possibly get any better or need any more power than what we've got.
To these people I say, come back when my Playstation produces graphics like this in realtime.
Perhaps this article, then, is not intended that way, and is placed under YRO for some other reason.
Depends. The Dreamcast had better deliverings initially, but it's unclear whether it could have kept up with the curve. The PS2 had (and still has to an extent) a lot of untapped potential that only showed up later due to development complexity; the Dreamcast pretty much had a standard devkit that took full advantage of the hardware right off. Now everyone seems to know how to use the PS2 a lot better; compare the in-game graphics of something like Shenmue (which looked good then) to something like MGS3, Jak3, or God of War, and you'll find PS2 surpasses.
Either way, it's irrelevant: Sega made it irrelevant. This is too bad, because I'd much rather see a race between Sony, Sega, and Nintendo than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
No, the specific quote from the article is "Burkett has commented that the visuals had been created on current nVidia hardware of roughly the same power as the RSX." That is, they don't have the RSX done, but they have hardware that's more or less equivalent to the specification in some form (maybe not on a single chip or card).
I hope so, because after some investigation, it appears Sony delivered on their promises.
For instance, one current myth is the FF8 tech demo was faked. Anyone who has played a modern PS2 game will not be impressed by those screenshots: the FFX engine was more impressive years ago (more colors, more textures, more geometry).
Another myth is Sony claiming that the PS2 can produce Toy Story level graphics. The original claim was the ability to render Toy Story in realtime, without shaders/T&L, and at a lower resolution. This is mostly a measure of the raw polycount the PS2 can push, not doing realtime Renderman in hardware. If you don't believe this, I suggest you go find a quote that claims anything more and is straight from the horse's mouth (a Sony press release or Sony spokesman). You won't. Everyone claiming anything else are either news media misunderstanding, or people in forums misquoting.
The PS2 has delivered quite a bit. Compare what it's been capable of over the past few years to what was available at the time (PS1, N64), and it was a pretty big leap. It's not hard to imagine people seeing original demos and overglamourizing, remembering things being a bit more than they were. We'll probably look at the PS3 demos someday and realize they're not all that great, when compared to the PS4 and other next-next-gen consoles. That's technological advance for you.
Give someone something unbelievable, and the first thing they'll do is not believe it. ;-)
Actually the only thing I can hope is that someday, somewhere, someone will make a remake of I-III that are completely and utterly unlike the originals. Because then someone in the future can actually enjoy Star Wars again.
So are 1-3, didn't stop Lucas!
Seemed to work in the Matrix. :-)
This hardly stops them even today. Look at most Anime discs and the like. You could easily fit the entire series on a single disc, but they split it up into 3-4 eps per disc (if you're lucky). Same with movies. Throw on a bunch of useless extras, use "high-definition" video to eat up lots of space, and release tons of editions.
Mostly, this is useful for pressing data. Large games, applications, etc. Really, DVDs are pathetically small and always have been: we should have been at 50-100G years ago.
Business execs can always come up with new ways to rip you off. (Besides, you think $20 isn't a ripoff? DVDs cost less than a penny to press and the box is cheap. Huge ridiculous profit margins.)
And you wonder why it's not on the front page? I've been fairly hyped to see whatever Nintendo was doing after the PS3 excitement, but... it's all vapor so far. And only vague promises at that. Granted, "Nintendo handwaves vaguely" wouldn't be considerably worse than some slashdot stories, but really... Nintendo hasn't earned a front-page story yet.
The new stick is basically the dual shock 2 that's wireless and redesigned to scream "this is the new generation" to anyone who sees it. Unless there are some additional features we haven't heard about.
Actually I don't like Microsoft, and they do tend to make really stupid mistakes from time to time. Ignoring the Internet for so long. Microsoft Bob. WebTV. Others I'm sure we can think of.
But I don't think they'll make this one, for all the reasons you mentioned, and possibly more: One, they're in denial. I think they believe they're superior in all ways, and unbeatable. Two, pride. "If you can't win 'em, join 'em", and they're not willing to admit they can't win, because they always have. Three, history: they never pick up on the latest technology until everyone else has, and they've still got a grip on the market.
Not having any games didn't help either. :-p
The only real reason for any of those platforms now is as a collector's piece. For all intents and purposes, they're failed platforms. If I saw a Virtual Boy for sale (reasonably), I'd probably pick it up... not because I'd play it, but to collect a piece of Nintendo history, even if it was a darker moment.
The sales status of something doesn't matter to me... if it did, I'd hardly run Linux, or play various lesser RPGs (Everblue 2 rocks), etc. What does interest me is simply the games. XBOX never had any that were console sellers for me. Dreamcast games you can mostly get for other platforms now (Shenmue and Skies of Arcadia being the biggest, for me). Saturn technically had a few interesting games (Nights, Virtua Fighter), but far too expensive an investment.
Also, if you haven't been keeping up with your PS2 games, you've been missing a lot. Either that or you're a fan of a very limited scope of games (perhaps sports games?). Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but if you've missed stuff like GTA:SA, Jak3, Metal Gear Solid 3, Shin Megami Tensei (3 and DDS), Sly2, Phantom Brave, Ys6, GT4, God of War, you've missed out on quite a lot, even if there are a couple in that list that don't interest you for whatever reason (genre, violence, etc). There are some interesting B games here and there as well (I'm working on Obscure at the moment... kinda a Silent Hill Lite).
It's all about the games. The next generation will be an interesting thing to see, but currently, the XBOX 360 isn't looking much more enticing than the XBOX. Waiting to see what the PS3 and Revolution have to offer is definitely prudent, and likely to pay off as in previous generations.
Congrats, you broke my bullshit detector.
First, if you work for someplace with an NDA, it covers any nondisclosure information unless they're totally incompetant... so even if you overheard someone while getting coffee, you're probably still breaking NDA. In fact, you could be breaking NDA even if it's not true.
Second, the revenue stream for a console is its games. Weak or no copy protection scares developers. The Xbox 360 will probably be sold at a huge loss, so there's no profit from just selling consoles. Is mindshare worth that much?
Third, even if you're telling the truth on both counts, I wouldn't be bragging about this. It makes the 360 reek even more of Dreamcast: out early, no protection, big hype... big flop.