Evilhead
-
Posts
564 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Evilhead
-
-
So what if whatever company has bad management/marketing/shit ? In the end, all that matters is the games.
I sure hope you don't go into business.
I was talking from a consumer's perspective. I don't care who innovates more than whom (and who copies whom), or who has bigger balls than whom, or who makes the best ads, or who cares the most about children, I just want to play good games.
I'm well aware that marketing has a huge impact on sales, I'm just saying that for us, who are relatively well informed about the industry, it shouldn't.
I don't really care if people from Sony say : "We want this system to be expensive and we want to fuck our customers up the ass" whereas people from Nintendo say : "We want a revolution in the gaming world and we care about the gamers, especially the hard core, since we work hard to make the best games for them so that they can have a thoroughly enjoyable experience".
A company exists to make profits, and it's all just a bunch of guys working on projects. There are just different ways to pass it on the public. They don't wanna be friends with us, they want us to buy their games.
In the end, all that matters to us are the game themselves, not what the company that makes the console looks like.
Agreed 100%. I'm so sick of people politiziing gaming. No company, so far, has played any dirtier than the other, and if they did, who cares? That how a business works. They are all out for profit in the end. All I care about is how the games are. If Sony DID start using slave labor or whatever, I MIGHT start to reconsider my purchase, but that's not the case. They just have a hardline business strategy that seems to be working.
-
All this boycotting Sony and 'never buying their stuff again' doesn't hurt them. It only hurts the person doing it.
Sony literally has the whole company on the line with the PS3 - boycotting them can have a tremendous effect on their future.
Only if, say, several million people call to arms and refuse to purchase. I was trying to point out the minority who decided against Sony for this single incident.
I still can't figure out why people are 'boycotting' Sony in the first place. Too expensive? That's not boycotting, that's called not being able to afford it or not thinking it's worth the money. Which is fine. What other reasons are there? Everything else seems to be unrelated to the actual PS3 unit itself. Did you guys love Lik-Sang THAT much?
I still can't figure why people seem to have a particular attachment to a corporation. I just happen to like games that are on the playstation...
So what if whatever company has bad management/marketing/shit ? In the end, all that matters is the games.
Exactly. It's all about the games. Anything to do with politics is completely retarded. Unfortunately, most people here do not understand this.
-
All this boycotting Sony and 'never buying their stuff again' doesn't hurt them. It only hurts the person doing it.
Sony literally has the whole company on the line with the PS3 - boycotting them can have a tremendous effect on their future.
Only if, say, several million people call to arms and refuse to purchase. I was trying to point out the minority who decided against Sony for this single incident.
I still can't figure out why people are 'boycotting' Sony in the first place. Too expensive? That's not boycotting, that's called not being able to afford it or not thinking it's worth the money. Which is fine. What other reasons are there? Everything else seems to be unrelated to the actual PS3 unit itself. Did you guys love Lik-Sang THAT much?
-
http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=6408
A list of some features/comments about some hands on time with the PS3.
Notable: Games will be $59.99 (at least for first party titles), hopefully laying to rest rumors of $100 games.
-
But you are an idiot. Your very acceptance of the way Sony acts proves it. If any other company acted this way to you, would you still support them, fan-wise and money-wise? If not, than you're a hypocrite; if so, than you're a goddamn sheep of a human being for toadying along with them.Oh that's right, you consider saying, "I don't think the Wii is the greatest thing since oxygen" is me crying and screaming and being an idiot.Acted what way? Protecting their copyrights? As it was mentioned before, Nintendo and Microsoft also went after Lik-Sang. Won without having to actually fight, but would they have won in court? Probably. Lik-Sang was in the wrong, and if Sony stepping up to bat and crushing them pisses you off then that's your own problem.
I boycott companies for human rights violations. Not for protecting it's copyrights.
-
I have to see Evilhead's comment on this. I really do.
Since when have I become the representative of Sony?
Nobody said you were a represenative. You just bawl everytime your precious company gets bad press. In other words, it's expected of you.
Site one time when I did? Please.
Mostly I make comments in the Wii thread and troll you morons like no tomorrow. I seriously don't give a fuck about Sony aside from the fact that I like Playstation games.
I don't deny you think you're trolling, but you're not. You're trying to make something of yourself on a message board by making over-the-top idiotic statements and in the end, nobody cares. No one. Have fun yelling at your monitor while Sony gets more bad press, crybaby.
Who's yelling? Who's crying? Who's making idiotic statements? I said I thought it was a bad move on Sony's part but in the end I couldn't give two shits about Lik-Sang. They played in a legal grey area and got what they asked for. Too bad for them.
Oh that's right, you consider saying, "I don't think the Wii is the greatest thing since oxygen" is me crying and screaming and being an idiot.
-
I have to see Evilhead's comment on this. I really do.
Since when have I become the representative of Sony?
Nobody said you were a represenative. You just bawl everytime your precious company gets bad press. In other words, it's expected of you.
Site one time when I did? Please.
Mostly I make comments in the Wii thread and troll you morons like no tomorrow. I seriously don't give a fuck about Sony aside from the fact that I like Playstation games.
-
I have to see Evilhead's comment on this. I really do.
Since when have I become the representative of Sony?
I couldn't care less what the company does. Kill off small businesses? Do I give a shit? No. All I care about is the games. Everything else is just politics, and extremely stupid politics at that. If you are going to get up in arms about something, there are many more pressing matters in the world today. Video games are not that important.
-
I don't think Sony will be sitting on thier hands while the Wii is selling hotcakes. They will be producing the PS3 as fast as they can. The shortage hype will help boost interest, then when the second batch of consoles are released you can be sure those will be snapped up as well. I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that I won't be able to get a Japanese PS3 at launch, but I will definitely get one as soon as I can.
-
Well, when I say "hardcore gamer" what I really mean is "avid gamer". Someone who buys more than one system per generation and spends a significant amount of time and money on games. Also someone who buys older games and systems. A casual gamer is somone who owns maybe one or two game systems total, tends to rent games rather than buying them, and can at times go for a week or two without playing at all.
And I think it's quite an assumption that most people who use the internet and have a game system at their house pour over video game news sites. Hell, I consider myself a fairly hardcore gamer and I rarely read gaming news beyond what is posted here or new release annoucements. If you walked up to some young person on the street and asked them what they think about all the statements Sony has been making lately, I'm betting you'll be getting a big 'huh?' from most people.
Yes, price is definitely a factor, and if they don't release the PS3 for under the suspected price (which happened for the PSP), they might lose some of their market to Nintendo or Microsoft initally, but I don't the PS3 flopping by a long shot. It's just got too much support. People often site the 3D0, NeoGeo, CDi, or other expensive consoles that didn't do well. But each of those systems had very limited software support. The NeoGeo has a fantasic library, but unless you were a hardcore 2D fighter fan and were willing to drop $300 a game and $800 for the system it was not for you. The 3D0 and some other systems like the Jaguar, CDi, etc, failed because of miserable software. If the 3D0 had tons of great games for it, would it still have failed simply because it was expensive? I don't think so. The iPod for instance, is overpriced, like all Apple products. But consumers will desire the coolest, most advanced, most hip technology out there and will be willing to pay for it. Nintendo is doing well for copying Apple's designs and packaging though.
-
Now, we see Sony doing the exact same thing, but somehow they manage to do even worse. The high price, the completely batshit insane things their people are saying, their E3 presentation... I can't understand how Sony can not realise what's going to happen.
Honestly I don't see what the big deal is, other than the price. And I would definitely not be surprised to see price cuts in the States similar to the ones in Japan. Other than the cost, does you're average consumer watch live E3 coverage, or even know what the hell E3 is in the first place? Do the read gaming blogs and keep track of every thing that comes out of some Sony exec's mouth? Do they care? The only people who are concerned about this kind of thing are hardcore gamers, and those kind of people are either so anti-Sony that they'd refuse to buy it simply out of spite or so into games that dropping $500 or so on a launch console isn't going to crush them too badly.
What, exactly, has ACTUALLY been bad about the PS3 so far aside from the assumption of a high retail price?
-
The whole point of including the blue ray player in there is to get people who wouldn't normally buy one to buy one. Duh.
-
My guess is that it will go down by roughly the same percentage - so whereas the PS2 was $300 and now $130 (reflecting a ~60% price cut), the PS3 will go from $600 to ~$350. That is still quite a lot though, which makes you wonder. Also, it may depend on how fast blu-ray catches on, if at all. One of the driving factors for the PS2's price drops was getting it out there as a cheap DVD player. Sony may try to cut the price more in an attempt to increase the number of people who adopt blu-ray.
Yeah, that seems to be Sony's strategy. Most people will buy the PS3 just to have a PS3. But unless you are some kind of technophile maniac, why would you buy a HDDVD player when you already have a Blu-Ray player? And if someone is shopping for a Blu-Ray or HDDVD player, a lot of them might think, "well, if I buy a PS3 I'll get an affordable player and a kickass game system that will rock my plasma screen." Sony is making a somewhat risky move that could end up making them a whole hell of a lot of money if they could have control over the next big media format. They've tried it a few times with MD and Betamax with limited success, but if you bundle it up with the already enormous success of the Playstation they might have a chance.
-
This would be one of the few instances of a multiple necked guitar being used creatively using all the necks i've seen. I know it's probably been shown to hell and back on ocr but it still amazes me.
I hadn't seen that before.
And holy monkeyfucking shit, the fretless neck sounds gorgeous. How's that set up? I mean, the description says it's a fretless with a sustainer, but what's a sustainer? Is it just compression, or is there something more to it?
I would assume it adds a lot of sustain? There might be some problems getting a long note out of a fretless guitar for some reason.
-
Why not just get 3 different guitars to suit your needs? It'd probably be cheaper and they'd be way more playable. The coolness factor goes away, but seriously: Do you think you could actually play that for more than a few minutes?
What coolness factor? If you have to rely on some flashy or rediculous guitar to make up for your lack of impressive playing, that is anything BUT cool. If in the course of one set a guitarist plays a regular six-string, a 12-string, and then a bass, I would be impressed, assuming he could play each well. If I saw some guy on stage with the guitar illustrated, I would be rolling on the floor laughing, even more so if he wasn't in a joke band.
-
If you are looking for a good custom guitar building shop, look here:
http://www.edromanguitars.com/custom/main.htm
But yes, it will cost you thousands, maybe up to 10,000 if you want good quality. But the main question is why? Unless you a professional musician in some famous band there is NO point in this guitar. It's just an extremely bad idea.
-
Can't they just put some blue plastic in front of a red laser or something?
They'll do that when they release the PS3 SP lite.
-
But how many half-ass failures will we see developed by 3rd parties?
Instead of looking at it with a negative side, what if the 3rd parties actually made titles that are pretty successful with the controller?
I'm sure there will be! My point was that I think Nintendo will lose some of the third parties this way. Let's say Company A has an idea for a game. Say, a katamari type game. They can't seem to integrate the Wii controller into the game very well. Are they going to put their effort into trying to release it for the Wii when the controller presents a challenge or are they going to go the "safe" way and release it for PS3/360 with improved graphics? Since the PS3 and 360 have similar amounts of power, I'm betting we'll see a lot of cross-platform games for the two, with the Wii developed for exlusively due to it's somewhat limited power and unique controller. Now as anti-Nintendo as I may sound at times, I'd LOVE to play some truly welldone 3rd party Wii titles. I can imagine it breathing fresh air into a lot of genres like 3rd person shooters, flight sims, RTSs, etc. But I'm afraid a lot of 3rd parties won't be willing to take the risk and we'll be left with a lot of excellent 1st party titles for the Wii and a few 3rd party gems here and there.
Getting way off topic here, but I guess it can't be helped!
-
Didn't Kak get banned?
(Oh and try to rememeber to cap your post 12345, I forgot mine.)
I already missed 12321... ;_;
-
As far as the tilt sensor on the PS3, I'm perhaps the only one who is looking forward to it a bit. Yeah, it was tacked on pretty last minute, and they weren't prepared to show it off very well at E3, but by the time the system is released it should be able to do what you'd expect it to do.
I don't get why so many people are against it. The ONLY reason that people talk badly about the tilt functions is because they are pissed that Sony "copied" Nintendo, even though the controller is completely different. One is a wand, one is a pad with tilt functions. When it Wii remote was announced everyone was all like, "OOOOO COOL NEAT-O MOVE MY HAND AND WOWZERS!!" then when Sony mentioned the PS3 controller can do motion detecting stuff everyone was all "PMG $ONY DOES IT AGAIN *SPUTTER* *RAGE*". Personally I'm not sold on the motion sensing thing. I think it's a gimmick that will get old, like the stylus on DS. But I like the route Sony is taking with their controller. The tilt functions can be used by developers if they choose, to enhance APPROPRIATE games. For instance, you might have tilt functionality on a flight sim or a golf game. Or it could be a little part of the control, like in a platformer such as Spyro the Dragon. You use the main controls 90% of the time, but for those flying parts you use the tilt. With the Wii, you're going to use that remote no watter WHAT. Developers will have to force the remote functionalty into where it's not really necessary or even fun. Sure first party titles and some other releases will use it really well. But how many half-ass failures will we see developed by 3rd parties? How many will they be willing to risk, when they could make a 360/PS3 cross platform game with a large consumer base?
Sure the PS3 controller is not that innovative, but it is the most VERSATILE of the three consoles. And considering the wide array of games the PS3 will have for it, that makes the most sense.
-
You have a good point about PS3's customer service. It does seem too expensive to not have decent customer service, but if you get a PS3 on launch and it's defective, I don't think you'll be getting another one for a while, because there are going to be so few PS3s for a while, and they will be in high demand.
WHY would it be defective? Have you ever heard of a thing called quailty control? It's tested and sent out. Of the PS2 that were malfunctioning, what percentage of those were defective from the start? Were there ANY cases of this? The PS2s that have malfunctioned, usually in regard to reading dual layer DVDs, are problems that have cropped up YEARS later. We're talking about a 6 year old console here. So if you have your PS2 in a dusty house for 4 years and suddenly get disc read errors on certain DVDs, this means that PS3s are going to be defective right out of the box? I understand that Sony has a bad rep when it comes the the PS2, but come on. You're just exaggerating.
-
^ Totally agree with you Kitsuta. Implementing other peoples' ideas is the KEY to competition, evolution, and yes, innovation.
You couldn't be more wrong. Not only will Nintendo take them back for only one dead pixel, it was Sony who had that stupid policy. And on top of that, the policy was that it had to have TEN dead pixels, not five. Kind of sad to see that backfire on you. Twofold.My PSP actually developed a dead pixel when I shipped it in the mail, but it's somewhere I don't even notice it. A lot of DS's had dead pixels, and unless you had more than 5 or so, Nintendo wouldn't take them back either.Sources: http://www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-6023185-1.html
http://www.engadget.com/2004/12/07/nintendo-fixes-ds-with-one-bad-pixel/
I stand corrected then. I had just heard someone on here (Smoke?) who had trouble returning a DS with dead pixels and assumed it was a universal thing.
As for a virtual console on the PS3, it's pretty much a no-brainer for an online console with a harddrive. The 360 has been doing it for a while now (and yet you don't hear people whining about Nintendo stealing their idea). Emulation on consoles is not a new thing. Charging for it is. And really, who the fuck cares? If someone being able to download a Genesis game on their PS3 REALLY bothers you, you sir, need to get a fucking life. Seriously. Step out of the sunlight and get Nintendo's cock out of your mouth for a while. It's clouding your judgement.
-
And in general, beyond your personal experience but on average: did the PS2 have bigger hardware issues than the gamecube?
Obviously, yes. What exactly is your point here? Some PS2's developed problems down the line. Mine didn't, most people I know haven't had any problems, I just heard people complaining on the internet. I've had many other Sony products that work without fail though, so I don't expect a lot of hardware failures for the PS3. If I have an issue, it should be under warranty for a while, so there's not really a problem. On the other hand, my friend's GameCube died from a small 2 foot drop from a low table to the floor. Yes, Nintendo generally makes solid hardware, but it's more luck and how you treat your system than anything. I'm betting most PS2 with disc read errors just need a lens clean. Fixes most problems instantly.
-
^ Exactly. Until the actual system is released and there are official prices I'm just ignoring all the rumors.Nintendo DS's only need 1 dead pixel to trade it in. They didn't need a set number, as long as you had 1, you could trade yours in for a new one.
I dunno, there were some people on here who had issues with that. Smoke?
No matter what the return policy, you have to admit that the PSP had more hardware troubles than the DS.
And I believe the minimum was 1 pixel per screen...
Well, both have had dead pixels. The PSP had a lot more due to crappy shipment from Japan to the states. The PSP had a cruddy square button on some units (which actually doesn't affect gameplay, it just feels 'squishy'). The DS lite has a tendancy to have it's hinges break, and, in my experience, the DS screen is a lot easier to scratch than it should be. I'd say both have had their hardware problems, but yes, the PSP does have a worse reputation. I love both systems though.
Sony PS3
in General Discussion
Posted
I don't think I'll even try... Getting new game systems is just too hard in Japan, unless it's an Xbox.