Sony PS3

[SilverStar]

You can already run emulators, media players, web browsers, etc on a PS3 with the option to install one of the various flavors of Linux. The problem is that when running a separate OS you do not have access to the RSX so any type of video acceleration is a no go. When using a media player you have to use software-rendered full screen and playback suffers depending on your resolutions and bitrates. I was able to full screen SD Xvid encoded video files but trying to full screen h.264 or HD encoded video files resulted in choppy playback.

I was able to get Snes9x up and running with some minor sound problems as well as MAME up and running with the same sound problems. If anyone ever goes about optimizing software to use an SPE to handle things like video acceleration the PS3 could easily substitute as an HTPC. At the moment the lack of optimization and lack of access to RSX kills most of its value.

And for the MS side of the argument, MS has launched a competition for their XNA development environment, where they have something like 100 prizes of a grand or 10 for the top productions made with their tools.

[SleazyC]

And for the MS side of the argument, MS has launched a competition for their XNA development environment, where they have something like 100 prizes of a grand or 10 for the top productions made with their tools.

XNA is a pretty amazing push by MS to tap the Indie and Hobbyist sectors to bring out some fun and innovative games.

What Sony is doing on the other hand is allowing the end user to install another OS (at the time only Linux but I assume we might see something else later down the road) and then stopping there. Running Linux we could theoretically see a lot done with the PS3 but it's really a different direction then XNA. With XNA you can develop games that utilize the full hardware of the 360 but you won't see Media Players or emulators coming out. Now when we can finally inject some different OS into the flash of the 360 we might see an explosion of homebrew but at the moment most of it is restricted to flashing the firmware of the optical drive and thus is tied to piracy mainly.

[Evilhead]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

I've never complained about "kiddy" games. I hate dumbed down games in pretty much any form, but I'm open to all kinds of visual style. I loved the Katamari series, Loco Roco, Animal Crossing, etc.

LBP seems like a cool game, but it hasn't really changed my overall opinion on the PS3. I still plan to get one eventually, maybe after a price drop. Right now LBP ranks somewhere around 6 or 7 on my most wanted PS3 games. As of now I'd much rather have a 360. Plan on getting one once I'm back in the states.

[Merk]

As of now I'd much rather have a 360. Plan on getting one once I'm back in the states.

Why when you're back here, are they sold out in Japan?

[Evilhead]

Why when you're back here, are they sold out in Japan?

No, they are far from sold out here. In fact, I could get one cheaply since they are extremely unpopular but I'd like an American system because a lot of the best games don't come over here, whereas most good Japanese games make their way over to the states in the case of the 360.

[Specter]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

Um, because LBP is driven almost completely by user created content, and is more of a game-creation tool than a game itself. The whole thing is run by a physics engine so the player can theoretically make anything, not just a platformer. The fact that it's cutesy is just because it goes well with the accessibility of the whole thing.

[Piracy]

I'm gonna requote my post because i dont think anyone saw the the post since the threads merged.

Diracy;242852']Many of you have maybe already seen this' date=' some of you may have not. These are scans of the April issue of EGM, and feature the new Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction. Looks like PS3 has its first killer app.

And a video from the GDC conference....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5m6n1U-pTM

[SleazyC]

So... why is it that people bitch and complain about how kiddy Nintendo games are, but fucking orgasm over LittleBigPlanet like it's some sort of lesbian orgy?

Let's see...

1. It's a game where little dolls run around.

2. It's set in a world made up of toys, blocks and stylized cartoon drawings.

3. The music is whimsical and sounds like it would fit in perfectly on an episode of Azumanga Daioh or one of those short-lived Disney cartoons you see on Family Channel.

I'm not seeing how this is any different. Where's Evilhead? He should have some interesting reasons how this is completely different and better.

Maybe because Sony has offered a diverse lineup with a pretty large selection of mature games (not just M rated games) while Nintendo systems have always been stigmatized as having a much more family oriented approach and much less mature games in comparison.

I think the whole kiddy argument is pretty stupid but when it comes down to image you can hardly argue that Sony has held a much more mature one when compared to Nintendo if we just look at all the M rated games published by Nintendo versus Sony (not talking about third party here but first or second party games).

My two cents anyways...

[SilverStar]

Maybe because Sony has offered a diverse lineup with a pretty large selection of mature games (not just M rated games) while Nintendo systems have always been stigmatized as having a much more family oriented approach and much less mature games in comparison.

I think the whole kiddy argument is pretty stupid but when it comes down to image you can hardly argue that Sony has held a much more mature one when compared to Nintendo if we just look at all the M rated games published by Nintendo versus Sony (not talking about third party here but first or second party games).

My two cents anyways...

And if you want to look at only first party games, Nintendo has done far better than Sony, all around. Nintendo games are, sadly, usually the best of their peers. And are usually among the first to try it, too. The results, are that everything else, be it on their system or otherwise, tends to fall vastly short with far more flaws.

Maybe one day Nintendo will go the way of Sega and go strictly software, with no hardware allegiance? If so, then you'll start seeing the real effects of Nintendo, spread across all fields. Sony and Microsoft would both start to be labeled as being "too kiddy" because of how incredibly well the Nintendo games would do, causing other developers to try to emulate the successes.

One thing you have to consider, is that Nintendo sells more software than pretty much any other company, regardless of having such a small installed userbase. And by Nintendo, I mean internal and 2nd party developers(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).

[Specter]

(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).

Uh, SCE? They did a little title called God of War. Also, Shadow of the Colossus, but I don't know if you've heard of those since they're such small titles, and not really all that remarkable.

[SleazyC]

And if you want to look at only first party games, Nintendo has done far better than Sony, all around. Nintendo games are, sadly, usually the best of their peers. And are usually among the first to try it, too. The results, are that everything else, be it on their system or otherwise, tends to fall vastly short with far more flaws.

Can't argue against this one really as Nintendo is the king of software but if we look at the crux of why fanboys call Nintendo "kiddy" it is due to the fact that they really lack the diverse lineup that has allowed Sony to introduce Little Big Planet without the cries off "kiddy game."

Maybe one day Nintendo will go the way of Sega and go strictly software, with no hardware allegiance? If so, then you'll start seeing the real effects of Nintendo, spread across all fields. Sony and Microsoft would both start to be labeled as being "too kiddy" because of how incredibly well the Nintendo games would do, causing other developers to try to emulate the successes.

If Nintendo were to go third party I still don't think you would see Microsoft of Sony being labeled kiddy due to my previous point that at the moment their current and previous consoles had much more diverse lineups to the point that fanboys couldn't point out and say that all Nintendo made were kiddy games.

One thing you have to consider, is that Nintendo sells more software than pretty much any other company, regardless of having such a small installed userbase. And by Nintendo, I mean internal and 2nd party developers(since I don't think Sony themselves have actually MADE any games, they've had to rely on second party dev studios to do all the software work for them, while they just handle the licensing).

Currently Nintendo has a pretty damn huge market share not only in the handheld market (which they have owned for years and years) but they are picking up incredible steam in the console market as well. Even then they had incredibly good tie-ratios with the Gamecube. One thing that is pretty consistent with Nintendo and any hardware they bring out is that they can also bring the software sales.

In the end I think the true fault lies with third parties letting this stigma of Nintendo having a "kiddy" image get to them. They could always weasel their way out of it with the Gamecube saying that sales were too low but given the Wii's current sales and its projected sales that isn't an excuse for developers anymore. I look forward to seeing some more mature games released on the Wii (not only talking about only blood, guts, and sex here) but I really don't see how people argue that some type of double standard is being pulled because LBP looks to be something that Nintendo would have brought out and people aren't calling them out for releasing a "kiddy" game.

[SilverStar]

Uh, SCE? They did a little title called God of War. Also, Shadow of the Colossus, but I don't know if you've heard of those since they're such small titles, and not really all that remarkable.

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable.

Typically, Sony doesn't do a lot internally. They just grab second parties to do their stuff for them. You know, like the Gran Turismo series(done by Polyphony Digital, which is owned by Sony).

[Bigfoot]

If people are crying over Devil May Cry 4 not being a PS3 exclusive, what are they going to do if Final Fantasy XIII rumor is true about it not being an exclusive as well?

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/22/loyalists-cry-over-devil-may-cry-on-xbox-360/

[wormguy]

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable.

Are you retarded?

Are you retarded?

I'm not a Sony fan at all, but damn if those aren't fantastic games.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Haven't played either, so to me they aren't very remarkable.

Typically, Sony doesn't do a lot internally. They just grab second parties to do their stuff for them. You know, like the Gran Turismo series(done by Polyphony Digital, which is owned by Sony).

Wow, were you high while making that comment? So I guess stuff like Eternal Darkness and all those great Rareware games in Nintendo's past were not credible Nintendo games at all then?

And no matter how you can spin it, God of War, Sly, Ratchet & Clank , Shadow of the Colossus and a lot of Sony 1st party games have been almost flawless examples of pure gaming in recent memory. Just because Nintendo has the more marketable names doesn't necessarily make them the only 1st parties around. But I would have to agree with the notion that Sony 1st parties tends to be ignored because they don't strut around their big buttocks of it being a Sony property unlike how Nintendo does it, shoving their franchise names up everyones' throats.

[Bahamut]

Damn...why couldn't I have gotten one for free? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6482789.stm

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

If people are crying over Devil May Cry 4 not being a PS3 exclusive, what are they going to do if Final Fantasy XIII rumor is true about it not being an exclusive as well?

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/22/loyalists-cry-over-devil-may-cry-on-xbox-360/

What about the supposed "White Engine" that SE has designed specifically for the development of PS3 games?

I mean, unless they scale it or toss it out all together to design for the 360, which would be easier to develop for anyway.

[Vivi22]

Wow, were you high while making that comment? So I guess stuff like Eternal Darkness and all those great Rareware games in Nintendo's past were not credible Nintendo games at all then?

And no matter how you can spin it, God of War, Sly, Ratchet & Clank , Shadow of the Colossus and a lot of Sony 1st party games have been almost flawless examples of pure gaming in recent memory. Just because Nintendo has the more marketable names doesn't necessarily make them the only 1st parties around. But I would have to agree with the notion that Sony 1st parties tends to be ignored because they don't strut around their big buttocks of it being a Sony property unlike how Nintendo does it, shoving their franchise names up everyones' throats.

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

[Bahamut]

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

Wario Ware?

[G_D]

Agreed. Frankly, I haven't seen Nintendo make anything that tops Sony titles for creativity/fun factor in years. Sony is the best first party developer as far as I'm concerned, and one of the best developers overall, but no one really realizes it since it's usually their second parties with their names slapped on the titles.

And anyone who claims that God of War 1 or 2 aren't remarkable either hasn't played them, is high/brain damaged, or both (I suppose they could just be crazy too).

STOP. BEING. DUMB. Sony HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER develop a 1st party title. SONY IS NOT A DEVELOPER. They are a publisher. The only exclusives they have are at best 2nd party titles (i.e. GT4, God of War, Ico/SotC, etc.) and at worst 3rd party exclusives (i.e. Virtua Fighter, Final Fantasy, etc. which are getting more and more rare).

Sadly enough, if we were to get into a "best developer" debate, I'd probably be tempted to go with Namco/Bandai. Nintendo is the best 1st-party developer, since I believe it is also the ONLY 1st-party developer now that Sega is software-only.

EDIT: Forgive me, I lied. Apparently SCE developed Ape Escape and LocoRoco.

EDIT 2: It seems the only difference between Sony and Nintendo is that Sony incorporates their 2nd-party devs to make them look like 1st-party. Nintendo keeps themselves separate as a developer from their 2nd-party devs.

EDIT 3: What the heck. Apparently I don't know anything, and you should ignore this whole post. Somehow Intelligent Design and Retro Studios are 1st-party...

[Bahamut]

STOP. BEING. DUMB. Sony HAS NEVER and WILL NEVER develop a 1st party title. SONY IS NOT A DEVELOPER. They are a publisher. The only exclusives they have are at best 2nd party titles (i.e. GT4, God of War, Ico/SotC, etc.) and at worst 3rd party exclusives (i.e. Virtua Fighter, Final Fantasy, etc. which are getting more and more rare).

Sadly enough, if we were to get into a "best developer" debate, I'd probably be tempted to go with Namco/Bandai. Nintendo is the best 1st-party developer, since I believe it is also the ONLY 1st-party developer now that Sega is software-only.

Microsoft has been making games for over a decade IIRC - they just didn't expand as much until they started their XBox initiative.

[PriZm]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-party_developer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-party_developer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_developer

Just to make it absolutely clear, Sony IS a developer.

[RealFolkBlues]

Wario Ware?

Weird. Quoting someone doesn't include their quotes anymore. Hmmm.

As for fun factor, I can't think of too many Nintendo first- or second-party titles that really made me grind my teeth to play them. This is the company that gave us Wii Sports for God's sake.

Obviously, when it comes to creativity, there are points both for and against the Big N. Fanboy though I am, I will admit that yes, they do whore out their franchises a little, especially Mario. Can you really blame them, though? Mario is amongst the most, if not THE most recognizable of company mascots in the world. Also, many of these titles are innovative ideas with familiar characters strapped to them, such as the aforementioned Wario Ware. Every once in a while, though Ninty will stray far from a formula, often for awesome results, such as the freakin' brilliant Pikmin series or Animal Crac...err...Crossing.

The principle difference I see between Sony and Nintendo in terms of internal development is that Sony is rarely focusing as much of their resources on the matter, or at least, not producing as much in the end. What they have made is usually pretty excellent, but, fairly understandably, Nintendo has in the past and continues to push this side of their software with force, outstripping them at least in terms of quantity, if not quality as well.

BTW, propers to G_D for admitting your mistakes with those edits.

[Ero Elohim]

The only issue I have with Sony as a developer is their tendencies to milk a franchise more than even Nintendo. See: Ratchet and Clank.

First game comes out, does well. Every year afterward there is a sequel. Every. Year. Finally, the main PS2 franchise sputters out at the 4th game. The worst part is that the sequels weren't really any different from their predecessors. A few improvements made in Going Commando, but that was about it.

Jak was almost the same way, only it suffered a bit from "Xtreme Syndrome." Started as a mildly cutesy platformer and morphed into some wierd Mad Max shit.

And God of War, while a good game in my opinion, isn't really all it's cracked up to be. It's well-polished in some respects, but the combat system is still a bit sloppy. I played both games on their hardest modes, which only serves to highlight how cheap the game can be at times. **SPOILER**(Case in point: The Barbarian King in the swamp swings his hammer around when he's in big mode. From visual indication, you should be able to roll backwards and avoid it, but the hitbox still tags you and knocks you around. It makes the attack god-awfully difficult to dodge and I had to resort to a very cheap tactic to beat him.)**END SPOILER**

Don't get me wrong, though, Nintendo has been slacking a bit lately, too. They really needed to inject something new into the Zelda series, rather than relying on "OMG ZELDA: TP LOOKS LIKE OOT!!" As it is, Twilight Princess was a good game, but nothing great and new. I'm really hoping Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy can come up with some wicked new ideas.

[Koelsch1]

They really needed to inject something new into the Zelda series, rather than relying on "OMG ZELDA: TP LOOKS LIKE OOT!!" As it is, Twilight Princess was a good game, but nothing great and new. I'm really hoping Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy can come up with some wicked new ideas.

New ideas like what?