Last-Gen Console Discussions (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii)

Originally posted by S_D_J
Install base perhaps?... though both versions are in the top ten, and 360 has such a massive install base, but still PS3 versions made the list... huh...

And of course the PS3 versions made the list. Big name sports games are pretty much guaranteed to make top ten in the month they come out due to a strange convergence of sports and gaming interests. SoulCalibur is a highly-anticipated series as-is, and the Star Wars guest characters hyped the game exactly as they were meant to. It's just remarkable that the PS3 version is so many dozens of thousands of dollars lower in both cases.

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
like installations to make games have fewer and faster load times, or extra storage space on a disc, or free online.

What? MGS4 has an infinite amount of installations you have to sit through, that take several minutes, when something as simple as changing disc 1 to disc 2 takes one minute at most. And fewer and shorter loadings times? Are you kidding me? I remember there being a great amount of loading sequences and they weren't exactly what you'd call short and you had to press Start, which I found to be bit annoying and really unnecessary..

This also brings me to this question; Why wouldn't MGS4 be possible on the 360?

And SDJ, you're comparing a singleplayer only game with a game both singleplayer and online (which is pretty awesome even with the few glitchers here and there). I played through Uncharted, it was great, but the unlockables and such didn't motivate me to play through it again. Gears however, I have a playtime total of about 100+ hours online..

Originally posted by Raijin
What? MGS4 has an infinite amount of installations you have to sit through, that take several minutes, when something as simple as changing disc 1 to disc 2 takes one minute at most. And fewer and shorter loadings times? Are you kidding me? I remember there being a great amount of loading sequences and they weren't exactly what you'd call short and you had to press Start, which I found to be bit annoying and really unnecessary..

This also brings me to this question; Why wouldn't MGS4 be possible on the 360?

And SDJ, you're comparing a singleplayer only game with a game both singleplayer and online (which is pretty awesome even with the few glitchers here and there). I played through Uncharted, it was great, but the unlockables and such didn't motivate me to play through it again. Gears however, I have a playtime total of about 100+ hours online..

MGS4 is just one game that uses installations between acts, Not all games do this, other games may have just one install. Multi discs are not something to be proud about either, you know its also NOT cost effective, they have to pay for the royalities n shit, disc storage is becoming an issue with the 360, you have 2GB of data that microsoft requires developers to give up right off the bat. Sure compression is great these days, but what is compression when you have three discs? when one blu ray can do more than 3x a 4.7Gb disc. ID the people who i believe made Doom, and wolfenstein, are having this disc storage problem on 360 as we speak. They cant afford to release 3 discs for their new game "Rage". And they also cant have installations because not every 360 owner has a 20GB HDD. They also can't stream info via XBL because not everyone necessarily has access to internet with their 360. All these problems are crippling the 360 version, today it is a fact that their game will look worse on 360 than PS3 even with the remarkable compression technology available today. so tell me am i kidding?

also, i honestly i couldnt tell you why MGS4 might not be possible on 360, i didnt work on MGS4

and general k: did the PS3 outsell 360 in those monthes, or did they not, thats the bottomline

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
MGS4 is just one game that uses installations between acts, Not all games do this, other games may have just one install. Multi discs are not something to be proud about either, you know its also NOT cost effective, they have to pay for the royalities n shit, disc storage is becoming an issue with the 360, you have 2GB of data that microsoft requires developers to give up right off the bat. Sure compression is great these days, but what is compression when you have three discs? when one blu ray can do more than 3x a 4.7Gb disc. ID the people who i believe made Doom, and wolfenstein, are having this disc storage problem on 360 as we speak. They cant afford to release 3 discs for their new game "Rage". And they also cant have installations because not every 360 owner has a 20GB HDD. They also can't stream info via XBL because not everyone necessarily has access to internet with their 360.

Dude, do you how much space these disc have? Your stat on Blu-ray is actually a statistic for HD DVD storage. Blu-ray holds way more than that (I'll let you look it up for education's sake).

You really are just talking out your ass.

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
MGS4 is just one game that uses installations between acts, Not all games do this, other games may have just one install. Multi discs are not something to be proud about either, you know its also NOT cost effective, they have to pay for the royalities n shit, disc storage is becoming an issue with the 360, you have 2GB of data that microsoft requires developers to give up right off the bat. Sure compression is great these days, but what is compression when you have three discs? when one blu ray can do more than 3x a 4.7Gb disc. ID the people who i believe made Doom, and wolfenstein, are having this disc storage problem on 360 as we speak. They cant afford to release 3 discs for their new game "Rage". And they also cant have installations because not every 360 owner has a 20GB HDD. They also can't stream info via XBL because not everyone necessarily has access to internet with their 360. All these problems are crippling the 360 version, today it is a fact that their game will look worse on 360 than PS3 even with the remarkable compression technology available today. so tell me am i kidding?

also, i honestly i couldnt tell you why MGS4 might not be possible on 360, i didnt work on MGS4

and general k: did the PS3 outsell 360 in those monthes, or did they not, thats the bottomline

How on earth is multiple discs not cost-effective? An extra disc costs like...a quarter to print. If that. They don't have to pay extra royalties just because the game has to be spread over multiple discs, that's simply ridiculous.

It's certainly still FAR cheaper than the extra development time required to develop for the cell processor...

http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?story=53976

Wow, about the royalties thing...I didn't think that could actually be true. I'm saying that's just Microsoft being asses and nothing to do with the actual cost of a third disc, which is almost nothing.

Originally posted by Peach
How on earth is multiple discs not cost-effective? An extra disc costs like...a quarter to print. If that. They don't have to pay extra royalties just because the game has to be spread over multiple discs, that's simply ridiculous.

It's certainly still FAR cheaper than the extra development time required to develop for the cell processor...

http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?story=53976

Wow, about the royalties thing...I didn't think that could actually be true. I'm saying that's just Microsoft being asses and nothing to do with the actual cost of a third disc, which is almost nothing.

*sigh* im gonna have to go find that article again

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
*sigh* im gonna have to go find that article again

You can't find something 'again' that you never found and posted to begin with.

I found it already anyway and addressed it.

It is true that the disc itself is not the issue here. The problem is in their relationship with Microsoft, and how Microsoft is doing business with id.

Does anyone actually have much respect for id anyway? I mean, seriously.

I can't wait for the games they will put on this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc

or even this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc

droolio

Originally posted by xNIXSONx
MGS4 is just one game that uses installations between acts, Not all games do this, other games may have just one install. Multi discs are not something to be proud about either, you know its also NOT cost effective, they have to pay for the royalities n shit, disc storage is becoming an issue with the 360, you have 2GB of data that microsoft requires developers to give up right off the bat. Sure compression is great these days, but what is compression when you have three discs? when one blu ray can do more than 3x a 4.7Gb disc. ID the people who i believe made Doom, and wolfenstein, are having this disc storage problem on 360 as we speak. They cant afford to release 3 discs for their new game "Rage". And they also cant have installations because not every 360 owner has a 20GB HDD. They also can't stream info via XBL because not everyone necessarily has access to internet with their 360. All these problems are crippling the 360 version, today it is a fact that their game will look worse on 360 than PS3 even with the remarkable compression technology available today. so tell me am i kidding?

also, i honestly i couldnt tell you why MGS4 might not be possible on 360, i didnt work on MGS4

and general k: did the PS3 outsell 360 in those monthes, or did they not, thats the bottomline

Aren't blu-ray discs more expensive than DVD discs? But I can imagagin 3 DVD being a bit more costy but I'm probably wrong. I agree with you, the lack of storage space on most 360 HDDs might be a problem in the future for some developers like ID but I think it won't be such a severe problem so that the 360 won't be getting any solid titles. But then again, not much is known about Rage, it might be shit.

Also, with the big Xbox Dashboard update there's supposed to be an 'Install game" option, but I don't see how it's needed for current games.

Originally posted by General Kaliero
It is true that the disc itself is not the issue here. The problem is in their relationship with Microsoft, and how Microsoft is doing business with id.

Does anyone actually have much respect for id anyway? I mean, seriously.

I figured as such.

Originally posted by Peach
You can't find something 'again' that you never found and posted to begin with.

I found it already anyway and addressed it.

meaning i viewed the article, and ofcourse, i did not post it

i dunno if people within the industry respect id software but they made Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein...

also "Rage is set to ship for the Xbox 360 on two DVDs. Carmack says using three DVDs is not an option because it would spell exorbitant production costs. This is not a problem with the PS3 as it uses high-capacity Blu-ray discs" - carmack

but again, about titles like Rage that require more space. It is just one game, but it could be the first of many titles that utlize this reallistic graphics engine, that looks amazing, that has a lot of data. But yeah, it might be a shit game who knows.

if more developers in the future decide to do more of this, this may be the start of 360 games becoming inferior and very soon, outdated.

As specifically noted, that's nothing to do with production costs at all, it;s just the royaltieis issue- which Microsoft can change, and Carmack has said he hopes they do.

(A little searching around tells me that it is apparently industry sdtandard to charge royalties per disc; Nintendo and Sony do like wise. It is an outdated practice in this day and age).

So if it becomes a major issue they'll just change their financial arrangements on the royalties.

Originally posted by S_D_J

[b]I don't know for sure, but wouldn't that mean a price drop for the PS3 as well? 😕

[/B]

Would have to drop pretty sharp to keep up, which wouldnt hurt sales, but Sony havent made a profit on the console yet so lowering the price will kinda screw them over.

They have actually.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_bi_ge/japan_earns_sony

"In a bit of bright news, the Tokyo-based manufacturer marked a continued recovery in its long struggling video game section, which was profitable in the latest quarter in contrast to losses the previous year."

While I doesnt say console, but if the division is making profit, then it can lower the price of the console if they wanted too.

Originally posted by Outbound
Would have to drop pretty sharp to keep up, which wouldnt hurt sales, but Sony havent made a profit on the console yet so lowering the price will kinda screw them over.

they will be taking quite a risk, one I'm not sure they're willing to take, but still. One of the reason it's so pricey it's cuz of the BR, If BR prices drop (which still hasn't happened) so will production costs and a PS3 price drop could be more than possible, that will get rid of the price issue, putting at the same price as the 360, and that way they can still compete, and (possibly) eventually make up for their loss, if sales continue to increase...

but as of now, that's just wishful thinking...

EDIT: I remember that article, so it's possible... though whether they'll do it... I don't know

Originally posted by Raijin
....
And SDJ, you're comparing a singleplayer only game with a game both singleplayer and online (which is pretty awesome even with the few glitchers here and there). I played through Uncharted, it was great, but the unlockables and such didn't motivate me to play through it again. Gears however, I have a playtime total of about 100+ hours online..

That's my point, It's just a comparison I'm making based on what I think, just my opinion, just like HALO3 and MGS4, totally different games (MGS4 is mostly good for the first playthrough, but not so much for replay value, if you don't count MGSO) but it doesn't change the fact that both games are good in their own right, and so are the others... Good games worth playing....

the only valid point seems to be the price of the consoles (I'm taking about those good games)

though MGS pwns Halo IMO... 😛

I was referring to the main issue with Uncharted, that it didn't have online.

The only way I see MGS4 being better than Halo 3 is of course, the singleplayer, the online in Halo 3 however just outright owns MGO. It's balanced, userfriendly, has more users (even today), more people with headsets and is more fun (IMO). MGO however is the exact opposite of all that.

I remember 1up, who are very PS3 people ( a tad bias, but they dont overdo it) said that MGO was great, but only for 1 game out of 20. They had problems with basic MP design like spawn camping, but they loved the idea of Snake and controlling him, and the robot, but it only happens every so often and controlling the soldiers is pretty lame.

Originally posted by Smasandian
They have actually.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_bi_ge/japan_earns_sony

"In a bit of bright news, the Tokyo-based manufacturer marked a continued recovery in its long struggling video game section, which was profitable in the latest quarter in contrast to losses the previous year."

While I doesnt say console, but if the division is making profit, then it can lower the price of the console if they wanted too.

Nope- losses from the console production costs still pretty much outweigh those profits.

We all know the Wii is outselling the PS3 in terms of consoles sold; but what about game sells? Well I've looked into that:

Wii games sold: 188.85 million
PS3 games sold: 94 million

Got the info from Sony and Nintendo; couldn't find Microsoft's...oh well. That just means Nintendo is pwning Sony in both consoles and games. And don't forget the DS and PSP and how everyone said the PSP was going to be the DS killer.

DS games sold: 406.19 million
PSP games sold: 101.4 million

...and of course Microsoft doesn't have a handheld so I can't post that info. Nintendo pwns now in both the console and the handheld market where Sony...lost that huge lead it created with the PS2.