Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Sony: Metal Gear Solid 4 PS3 Only

Tags:
  • Sony
  • Playstation
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
January 9, 2008 3:35:36 PM

Article written by Rob Wright.

Sony did take the opportunity to preview what many believe will be the killer app for the PS3.

http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2008/01/09/ps3_metal_gear_solid_4/

More about : sony metal gear solid ps3

January 9, 2008 4:06:21 PM

Just hope they sell their million in one day..
January 9, 2008 5:42:12 PM

meh.
January 9, 2008 5:49:30 PM

killer. i guess.
January 9, 2008 6:49:07 PM

I almost guarantee it won't remain PS3 exclusive for long. Whether Konami ports it to 360 a few months to a year later or whether it's MGS4: Substitution or some rerelease like they did with MGS2 and MGS3. I think MGS4 will be too little too late when it comes to the PS3 regaining its footing. Unless they can start putting together a string of consistent hits and demonstrate that games on PS3 are superior to 360 and have developers take advantage of the supposedly more powerful hardware, then I think the PS3 is doomed except for people who want to dive into Blu-Ray.
January 9, 2008 9:39:05 PM

whats wrong with you fools. snake is the man and this app will kill (or sell...whatever).

maxor doesnt know what hes talking about. The ps3 is doing fine, blu ray is doing even better.

I hate it when people hear things once and never let go of them. Uncharted, rachet and clank, resistence, warhawk, killzone, mgs4, final fantasy....the list goes on and on. All reasons why the ps3 is doing fine on top of good multiplats such as cod4.

saying that the ps3 is dying is like saying that amd is kicking butt in the market, that is, what was true yesterday does not mean its true today.

January 9, 2008 9:56:38 PM

echofoxtrot said:
whats wrong with you fools. snake is the man and this app will kill (or sell...whatever).

maxor doesnt know what hes talking about. The ps3 is doing fine, blu ray is doing even better.

I hate it when people hear things once and never let go of them. Uncharted, rachet and clank, resistence, warhawk, killzone, mgs4, final fantasy....the list goes on and on. All reasons why the ps3 is doing fine on top of good multiplats such as cod4.

saying that the ps3 is dying is like saying that amd is kicking butt in the market, that is, what was true yesterday does not mean its true today.

Might aswell add ''The Last Remnant'' to that list. Personally, I think the ps3 is lacking some good rpgs, while the 360 does provide some, they are of little interest.As for the ps3 success I think its just taking time. Some great games are coming our way, and I mainly hope for its success for some Square-enix magic.
January 9, 2008 11:31:40 PM

Metal Gear Solid 3 was not released on the xbox.
January 11, 2008 12:13:39 AM

Echofoxtrot, I so completely agree with you.
Once upon a time it was true, now I simply don't have enough cash or time to buy all the great games I want; and unless you are seriously loaded and can play games all day long - nor would you. I am completely sick of hearing "the PS3 has only 3 good games" from fanboys who just reiterate garbage they hear and won't let go of it.
Whether or not MGS or any of the other PS3 exclusives go to Xbox is up for debate. What I can tell you for a fact is that almost all of the exclusives for Xbox have already shown that they do eventually get ported (and very readily due to their similar architecture) to the PC where I can play it on a better graphics card. I am talking about Halo, Gears of War etc. The few that haven't made the transition to PC will probably do so, or their are better versions of the genre already on the PC.
So I ask you, if you want already own a PC gaming machine, what would do you think is the better choice for games that you can't get any other system? That's not to mention you get a very useful media unit that plays the only relevant next gen HD medium for free.
January 11, 2008 1:08:29 AM

Lets not forget about Home, sick of people going on about gamer points on the Xbox360 what can you even do with gamer points????

Least when home hits, points on the ps3 will be worth something (i think lol)

Note i have all 3 next gen consoles and at this point i have only played my 360 for Halo 2,3 and Gears of War and now its not even connected up.

The wii for Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles and Wii Sports.

My ps3 has made up for its £420 price tag as i play it near ever day, listin to music and watch blu rays and I think i'll be playing it every day for awhile as no other console has any other most own game apart from mario cart on the wii and the ps3 has alot of games coming out and some apps that i want to see and use.
January 13, 2008 2:42:49 PM

echofoxtrot said:
whats wrong with you fools. snake is the man and this app will kill (or sell...whatever).

maxor doesnt know what hes talking about. The ps3 is doing fine, blu ray is doing even better.

Then how does it have some 20% of the 7th-generation console market, in a solid third place to the Xbox 360 and Wii? I really can't consider that "doing fine."

Similarly, Blu-Ray isn't really gaining traction terribly fast, at leat nowhere near as well as would be expected for something being advertised so ridiculously much.

echofoxtrot said:
I hate it when people hear things once and never let go of them. Uncharted, rachet and clank, resistence, warhawk, killzone, mgs4, final fantasy....the list goes on and on. All reasons why the ps3 is doing fine on top of good multiplats such as cod4.

I'd note that as far as exclusives go, both the Xbox 360 and Wii have very hefty lists... And to be honest, most of them have some that readily trounce any of those; Resistance, for instance, is hardly comparable to Halo 3 or Gears of War.

echofoxtrot said:
saying that the ps3 is dying is like saying that amd is kicking butt in the market, that is, what was true yesterday does not mean its true today.

I dunno. The PS3's still not doing markedly better. It's more or less trudging along as it has been.

Sengoku said:
Metal Gear Solid 3 was not released on the xbox.

That's true, but at that time, the Playstation 2 had more than half as many units out as the Xbox... The numbers were more of over four times as many.

I wouldn't be surprised that, in spite of Sony's claims and protests to the contrary, that Konami (which is, after all, a third-party company) decides to port it to the Xbox 360.
January 13, 2008 3:49:28 PM

My position is that there is nothing on the PS3 that I find particularly compelling whereas there are many titles for the XBox 360 that I find extremely compelling. Crackdown, Dead Rising and Mass Effect in particular. Though I always say, go where the games are. If the exclusives for the PS3 are more interesting to you, go with that.
January 13, 2008 4:54:49 PM

I second Info's position. As much as I enjoyed Ratchet & Clank, hey, it's just one game. Not quite enough to make me buy a PS3.

However, Blu-ray did give HD DVD a curb stomping at CES, so it looks like Blu-ray will begin to get more traction this year.
January 14, 2008 1:18:32 AM

Rob R&C is not the only PS3 exclusive. Drake is a very good game, Heavenly Sword is a good game, Resistance FOM is a very good game. On top of that there are those that are released on multi-platform, which in fact makes up the majority of all games, and these don't all of a sudden play crap just because it is running on a PS3. I think we had the debate before that what one person thinks is a 9+ scoring game, another might score a 7. You may not like these games - others in fact love them. What I am saying is that R&C does not make up the sole playable game on the PS3 - and getting one would not represent a total waste of money, which is the general feeling of the verbage that is spewed out parrot fashion on a lot of sites.
Further, I've mentioned this before, but most people who come to this site have gaming capabale PCs. How many of the Xbox exclusives are REALLY Xbox exclusives in 6 months time? Also has anyone considered I have been playing online countless hours of COD 4 and PE Soccer, without giving Sony one dime for the privilege?
HD-DVD didn't get stomped at CES, it's coffin was nailed shut. Everyone wants to go with a single medium because it will save grief in the long run. How Blu-Ray came to it's dominant position is irrelevant, it has that position because Microsoft passed up the opportunity to put HD-DVD in Xboxes, the fact of the matter is it's rise is inevitable. It's no good if 99% of the populace support HD-DVD in principle if no-one is putting out movies on it.
Why doesn't anyone think for a PS3, I am buying a very well priced Blu-ray player to get into the HD arena, and the games machine comes free?
The Xbox is a great games machine agreed but there is plenty to make PS3 a fantastic buy for games or otherwise. Get the system you feel comfortable with, but stop this unjustified negativity that generally goes along the lines of "there's only 3 playable games on the PS3, get an Xbox", which is repeated so much it is fed verbatim to all new console purchasers.
January 18, 2008 5:46:58 PM

mman74 said:
Rob R&C is not the only PS3 exclusive. Drake is a very good game, Heavenly Sword is a good game, Resistance FOM is a very good game.

Yes, but they are merely DECENT to GOOD... Hardly comparable to games that could be described a "Excellent," of which the PS3 is sorely lacking.
mman74 said:
On top of that there are those that are released on multi-platform, which in fact makes up the majority of all games, and these don't all of a sudden play crap just because it is running on a PS3.

Though many do play worse; I noticed that it appears that Madden NFL '08, for instance, runs at 30fps instead of 60fps... I chalked it up to the Xbox 360 having all its memory in one pool, so it could easily use its 300-400MB texture pack; being Madden, it doesn't really have need of 256MB of memory for the CPU alone. Furthermore, I'd note that although it requires a subscription, Madden is MUCH better played on Xbox Live than on the Wii or PS3's online service, for two reasons: first, Xbox Live has shown to be FAR more stable here (EA's servers seem to crash and you wind up never finishing a good chunk of your games) and also, you'll still be able to play Madden '08 online when Madden '09 comes out... Knowing EA, you can count on them to take down the servers for '08 the very day a sequel's out.

Likewise, I've noticed that the PS3 version of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion lacks anti-aliasing as found in the Xbox 360 version, primarily because the GPU in the PS3 is based upon the G70 core, which can't use OB's HDR and AA at the same time.

So yeah, while the gameplay might be the same, the graphics are worse.
January 18, 2008 6:20:22 PM

nottheking said:
So yeah, while the gameplay might be the same, the graphics are worse.


***sigh***

The PS3 has been out roughly a year. What will really make it take off is GT5. PS3 owners are in the same boat as 360 folk were, waiting for the "big dog" exclusive title to be launched. I.E. Halo 3. The first year the 360 was out it had plenty of titles but only now are it's games really looking good. Give PS3 time. Every console ever made didn't really hit it's stride until the 2nd generation and after games came out.

PS3 has Blu-ray, built in bluetooth, and online play is free.

As for graphics, this is what the PS3 is capable of and why GT5 is taking so long...



January 18, 2008 7:11:10 PM

KingLoftusXII said:
The PS3 has been out roughly a year. What will really make it take off is GT5. PS3 owners are in the same boat as 360 folk were, waiting for the "big dog" exclusive title to be launched. I.E. Halo 3. The first year the 360 was out it had plenty of titles but only now are it's games really looking good. Give PS3 time. Every console ever made didn't really hit it's stride until the 2nd generation and after games came out.

I'd actually argue otherwise: The Xbox 360 really hit it in 2006, well before its 1-year mark, with The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion and *especially* Gears of War, both of which out-sold anything on the PS3 by far. Similarly, the Wii had The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Wii Play, Wii Sports, and by now, Super Mario Galaxy.

Technically, it's "biggest dog," Super Smash Bros.: Brawl, the one game that people were talking about at the Wii's original release, has still not arrived... Yet the console's managed to do FAR better than the PS3, typically selling twice as many units during the same given amount of time.

KingLoftusXII said:
PS3 has Blu-ray, built in bluetooth, and online play is free.

It is true that the online play is free; as primarily a PC gamer, the subscription fee for Xbox Live is something I consider worth expressing indignation over. However, I'd note that it's ALSO free on the Wii as well.

KingLoftusXII said:
As for graphics, this is what the PS3 is capable of and why GT5 is taking so long...

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20071019/gt5p06.jpg
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20071019/gt5p09.jpg

Again, as a PC gamer, I'm not all that impressed, having seen the likes of Crysis. :p 

TBH, even in the perspective of console games, I'm not all that impressed: I see it typical of racing games: inordinate amounts of detail on the cars, and relatively primitive-looking landscape by comparison. It looks not much different in that respect from, say, Need for Speed: Pro Street. Plus, those screenshots are 800x450... Given that most "HD" console games don't even run at full 720p, that makes me question what resolution that game will run in at the end.
January 18, 2008 10:33:13 PM

I downloaded the GT HD Demo and it's damn near that. Don't get me wrong, as much as I'm looking forward to GT5 and all it's arcade eye candy, I can tell by the demo I will still prefer playing GTR 2 (PC) for it's purer simulation qualities. While fun, it cracks me up that kids think GT is a simulation...but I digress.

Overall, I think my Wii is more fun than my PS3. The funny thing about the hard-core PC gamers, who in a fit of glory dis all consoles because of their lack of realism is, what's more realistic than "rolling" the Wii controller like a bowling ball and giving it a slight twist as you do to get it hook at the end? Graphics included, that's much more "real" than amazing fps graphics and holding w down to walk...
January 20, 2008 2:36:21 PM

nottheking said:
Given that most "HD" console games don't even run at full 720p, that makes me question what resolution that game will run in at the end.
Owning Uncharted, I can tell you that it doesn't say it supports 1080p on the package, so supporting a resolution higher than 720p at all is actually a gift. In fact, before you posted that, I didn't even realize I could make it run at something higher than 720p on my 1080p display.

Now that Blu-ray has more or less beat out HD-DVD, paired with a pretty strong PS3 lineup this year, I'd imagine we'll see the system start catching up to the Xbox360 this year. The Wii however should remain on top because I'm pretty sure nothing can catch up to it's insane popularity.
January 28, 2008 12:14:40 AM

nottheking said:

Again, as a PC gamer, I'm not all that impressed, having seen the likes of Crysis. :p 


Which was my other point. Seeing as you have a Crysis capable PC, don't you think that a lot of the so called Xbox exclusives eventually get ported to the PC or have similar genre titles on the PC. I am talking about Halo and GOW. Mass Effect - the PC is packed full of decent RPGs. Forza - come on you want to compare that to GT5 when it comes out.
The Playstation has epitomized console gaming in what they offer. True most of that is on the Xbox as well, but of the unique ones my point is that you tend not to find them ported to the PC - Final Fantasy? For a PC gamer, does not a PS3 make a better compliment than a Xbox?
And whilst I acknowledge that games tend to have poorer FPS on the PS3, there are a number of issues in that. Generally it's easier coding on the Xbox and the fact that it's been out significantly longer but that is more to do with the developer, rather than the potential of the PS3, which in my view is better than the Xbox if only because of it's default HDD which the Xbox does not have.
And whilst this is not the point of this thread, which is gaming, one should not discount the fact that it comes with the only relevant next gen HD player, free internet gaming, serves as an excellent media center & web browser even second PC if you want, as well as great built quality - I'm sorry but the Xbox build reliability has been called into question - then overall you are getting a great gaming unit.
February 2, 2008 6:45:06 AM

Please don't take any of this personally; it's just been that over the past couple weeks, I've been finding that there's literally just about nothing defensible about the PS3, and hence any argument I see that tries to defend it comes across looking rather silly to me.
Heyyou27 said:
Now that Blu-ray has more or less beat out HD-DVD, paired with a pretty strong PS3 lineup this year, I'd imagine we'll see the system start catching up to the Xbox360 this year. The Wii however should remain on top because I'm pretty sure nothing can catch up to it's insane popularity.

I don't know... "beat" is a VERY relative term there, given that both (legally) downloaded video content as well as conventionally standard-def DVD sales both dwarf the sales of Blu-Ray products. The value of its ability to play Blu-Ray as a selling point matters not on whether Blu-Ray is more popular than HD-DVD, but how popular it is compared to the whole market. And in that respect, it's still got many years to go.

mman74 said:
The Playstation has epitomized console gaming in what they offer. True most of that is on the Xbox as well, but of the unique ones my point is that you tend not to find them ported to the PC - Final Fantasy? For a PC gamer, does not a PS3 make a better compliment than a Xbox?

To me, neither would really seem like a good compliment, as in many cases, the PS3 outright LACKS any decent games. FF XIII is still quite a long ways into the future, and it may very likely get ported to other systems due to the PS3's poor sales figures. Already titles like Grand Theft Auto 4 have lost their exclusivity on the PS3 before they even released... And it's hard to really blame them for wanting to avoiding releasing to an installed user base of only 6 million, which would drastically cut the game's chance at good sales... When the previous three GTA games for the PS2 all topped 10 million copies sold each.

mman74 said:
And whilst I acknowledge that games tend to have poorer FPS on the PS3, there are a number of issues in that. Generally it's easier coding on the Xbox and the fact that it's been out significantly longer but that is more to do with the developer, rather than the potential of the PS3, which in my view is better than the Xbox if only because of it's default HDD which the Xbox does not have.

Technically, the default Xbox *does* have a hard drive, and that version costs less than any version of the PS3; I personally find mention of how the "arcade edition" of the Xbox 360 (which is clearly set as a watered-down model) lacks a hard drive as an argument in favor of the PS3 to be pretty silly.

mman74 said:
And whilst this is not the point of this thread, which is gaming, one should not discount the fact that it comes with the only relevant next gen HD player, free internet gaming, serves as an excellent media center & web browser even second PC if you want, as well as great built quality - I'm sorry but the Xbox build reliability has been called into question - then overall you are getting a great gaming unit.

What if one doesn't give a flying care about "next gen HD" movies at this point? Blu-Ray may have a dominance over HD-DVD at this point, and the media has been harping all over that, but it's utterly crushed by the two competitors that the media haven't given a mention to: online distribution and DVD. Yes, the "obsolete" DVD.

Likewise, what good is "free" internet gaming when there aren't many games that support it, and very few good ones? And what good does a web browser do when a cheaper PC can do it better?
February 2, 2008 3:12:30 PM

nottheking said:
Please don't take any of this personally; it's just been that over the past couple weeks, I've been finding that there's literally just about nothing defensible about the PS3, and hence any argument I see that tries to defend it comes across looking rather silly to me.

I don't know... "beat" is a VERY relative term there, given that both (legally) downloaded video content as well as conventionally standard-def DVD sales both dwarf the sales of Blu-Ray products. The value of its ability to play Blu-Ray as a selling point matters not on whether Blu-Ray is more popular than HD-DVD, but how popular it is compared to the whole market. And in that respect, it's still got many years to go.
How many years did it take DVD to begin outselling VHS? You're in denial if you think HD-DVD has a chance of coming back with their current lack of studio support. Sure a year ago, the Xbox360 was vastly superior to the PS3, but not only are the PS3 versions on par with their 360 counterparts, we're seeing a pretty strong lineup of PS3 exclusives this year. I haven't even mentioned the RROD yet, which I experienced on my Elite yesterday. Luckily, I think it was a glitch triggered by that **** Conflict: Denied Ops demo crashing; after disconnecting and shaking the system around for a bit, it started back up normally. I then ran the system for 12 hours straight of Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and Halo 3 and still haven't gotten another RROD. I just hope I don't have to send it in to Microsoft for a month. :( 
February 3, 2008 8:21:32 AM

Heyyou27 said:
How many years did it take DVD to begin outselling VHS? You're in denial if you think HD-DVD has a chance of coming back with their current lack of studio support.

Wherever the heck did I suggest anything of the like that HD-DVD would "make a comeback?" I'd highly appreciate it if you would please REFRAIN from trying to put words in my mouth; I *do* know what I mean, even if others would like to think that they know what I mean better than I do. Do *not* try to construe my posts to have vague meanings that don't quite fit; it'll only serve to make you look ridiculous.

For reference, the first home DVD products, which had *no* competitors, first started selling in 1996, and it wasn't until around June 2003 that DVDs started truly out-selling it. Blu-Ray was released for the first commericial products in 2003, though it's still far, far behind DVD in sales levels... And way, WAY off track to have a hope to capture the market in the ~7 years it took DVD... I might estimate that it might take it at least 7 years *once* the "format wars" are over, whenever that happens. It'll certainly be a rockier road, as well: the PS2, from 2000 onward, was there to really help DVD along, (with some nearly 20 million units sold in its first year) while the PS3 clearly is not anywhere near as present.

Heyyou27 said:
Sure a year ago, the Xbox360 was vastly superior to the PS3, but not only are the PS3 versions on par with their 360 counterparts, we're seeing a pretty strong lineup of PS3 exclusives this year.

How did the PS3 versions become "on a par" with their 360 counterparts? By more or less saying "good-bye" to their ability to play older games? And perhaps a slight adjustment to their features otherwise? I honestly don't see much of what's changed... And as for PS3 exclusives this year... Last I checked, the only really strong game coming would be MGS4, for which pretty much all odds are pointing to it being ported to the Xbox 360 not long afterwards. (perhaps at the time when it'll debut the Substance/Subsistence/Sub-whatever edition?)

And again, one OKAY year of games would be insufficient to bring a console's lineup to be competitive against a lineup that is already *excellent*, and most importantly, is not standing still. (that last bit being a key point that literally 100% of the PS3's fans miss) Remember that Gears of War and Mass Effect are the first games in their own respective trilogies, with all three games planned as 360 exclusives or 360/PC Microsoft exclusives. And then there's the likes of Too Human, Fable 2, Ninja Gaiden 2, and Banjo-Kazooie 3.

Yes, there is all that talk about games for the PS3 in the distant future... But are people going to assume that they're going to come out at a time when there are no other games being released? And you really can't jab the 360 for being full of sequels if you're defending the PS3's future lineup... I mean, what with it having MGS 4, God of War 3, Gran Turismo 5, and all... ;) 

Heyyou27 said:
I haven't even mentioned the RROD yet, which I experienced on my Elite yesterday. Luckily, I think it was a glitch triggered by that **** Conflict: Denied Ops demo crashing; after disconnecting and shaking the system around for a bit, it started back up normally. I then ran the system for 12 hours straight of Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and Halo 3 and still haven't gotten another RROD. I just hope I don't have to send it in to Microsoft for a month. :( 

Well, I'd doubt it was a "serious" RROD, sincethey were effectively eliminated with the "Zephyr" revision; part of the problem apparently stemmed from the 90nm process that had been used for the CPUs; "Zephyr" units (which include all "elite" 360s) use parts made on a 65nm process instead.

Make no mistake: I'm not defending the 360 here. I'm attacking the PS3. The two are *not* the same.
February 3, 2008 10:24:55 PM

nottheking said:
Wherever the heck did I suggest anything of the like that HD-DVD would "make a comeback?" I'd highly appreciate it if you would please REFRAIN from trying to put words in my mouth; I *do* know what I mean, even if others would like to think that they know what I mean better than I do. Do *not* try to construe my posts to have vague meanings that don't quite fit; it'll only serve to make you look ridiculous.

For reference, the first home DVD products, which had *no* competitors, first started selling in 1996, and it wasn't until around June 2003 that DVDs started truly out-selling it. Blu-Ray was released for the first commericial products in 2003, though it's still far, far behind DVD in sales levels... And way, WAY off track to have a hope to capture the market in the ~7 years it took DVD... I might estimate that it might take it at least 7 years *once* the "format wars" are over, whenever that happens. It'll certainly be a rockier road, as well: the PS2, from 2000 onward, was there to really help DVD along, (with some nearly 20 million units sold in its first year) while the PS3 clearly is not anywhere near as present.


How did the PS3 versions become "on a par" with their 360 counterparts? By more or less saying "good-bye" to their ability to play older games? And perhaps a slight adjustment to their features otherwise? I honestly don't see much of what's changed... And as for PS3 exclusives this year... Last I checked, the only really strong game coming would be MGS4, for which pretty much all odds are pointing to it being ported to the Xbox 360 not long afterwards. (perhaps at the time when it'll debut the Substance/Subsistence/Sub-whatever edition?)

And again, one OKAY year of games would be insufficient to bring a console's lineup to be competitive against a lineup that is already *excellent*, and most importantly, is not standing still. (that last bit being a key point that literally 100% of the PS3's fans miss) Remember that Gears of War and Mass Effect are the first games in their own respective trilogies, with all three games planned as 360 exclusives or 360/PC Microsoft exclusives. And then there's the likes of Too Human, Fable 2, Ninja Gaiden 2, and Banjo-Kazooie 3.

Yes, there is all that talk about games for the PS3 in the distant future... But are people going to assume that they're going to come out at a time when there are no other games being released? And you really can't jab the 360 for being full of sequels if you're defending the PS3's future lineup... I mean, what with it having MGS 4, God of War 3, Gran Turismo 5, and all... ;) 


Well, I'd doubt it was a "serious" RROD, sincethey were effectively eliminated with the "Zephyr" revision; part of the problem apparently stemmed from the 90nm process that had been used for the CPUs; "Zephyr" units (which include all "elite" 360s) use parts made on a 65nm process instead.

Make no mistake: I'm not defending the 360 here. I'm attacking the PS3. The two are *not* the same.
So you acknowledge that HD-DVD cannot come back against the competition from Blu-ray, but you say it will not then be the choice for High definition movies? I know HVD sounds cool and all, but I'd say it's more likely those will never see the light of day from a consumer standpoint, unless we're talking about 10 years from now. I hope you're right about my Elite, as I'd seriously hate to send it in for awhile. Just one question; why do you choose to attack the PS3 as you've admitted? I was pretty pissed at Sony for awhile due to the arrogance of their marketing team claiming things like "the PS3 would sell without games" or about it being faster than any computer out, but after actually getting my hands on one I've seen it for what it is. I like both my Xbox360 and PS3 equally, but my Wii hardly gets touched.
February 4, 2008 1:46:52 AM

Heyyou27 said:
So you acknowledge that HD-DVD cannot come back against the competition from Blu-ray, but you say it will not then be the choice for High definition movies? I know HVD sounds cool and all, but I'd say it's more likely those will never see the light of day from a consumer standpoint, unless we're talking about 10 years from now.

The problem I think you've completely missed here is that the basis for Blu-Ray's success relies ENTIRELY on the premise that high-definition movies and shows become the norm. For the vast majority of people, (of which very, very few are enthusiasts, I'd note) they simply do not own an HDTV. Hence, no matter what features Blu-Ray may claim for them, the main reason for using it in the first place is utterly moot, since they can't even display anything above 480p, if that.

Likewise, there is still another form of competition that is doing strongly for HD content, and that's downloads. While I personally like having physical media myself, I will admit that it provides the distinct advantage of not requiring any form of particular hardware: just hardware that meets the general standards for support of H.264 and HDCP.

Heyyou27 said:
Just one question; why do you choose to attack the PS3 as you've admitted?

This is a kinda silly question, don't you think? :kaola: 

Nonetheless, I'll put it this way: I don't place any real stock in opinions for the sake of opinions; I consider them pretty worthless. I recognize that it is NOT the case that "all opinions are equal." Their value is determined entirely by the strength of the facts behind them.

Heyyou27 said:
I like both my Xbox360 and PS3 equally, but my Wii hardly gets touched.

Well, I happen to own none of them. It is very rare for me to play a single-player game on a console; there are a few, but they are definitely not very common. When I play console games, it's almost always along with someone sitting next to me. (or elsewhere in the room, whatever) So while I've played on the three 7th-generation consoles pretty heavily, (combined, perhaps twice as much as I've played on my own PC over the past year) it's been invariably with someone else with me. If I want to play alone, I actually use the PC.
February 4, 2008 11:21:56 AM

nottheking said:
The problem I think you've completely missed here is that the basis for Blu-Ray's success relies ENTIRELY on the premise that high-definition movies and shows become the norm. For the vast majority of people, (of which very, very few are enthusiasts, I'd note) they simply do not own an HDTV. Hence, no matter what features Blu-Ray may claim for them, the main reason for using it in the first place is utterly moot, since they can't even display anything above 480p, if that.


Don't know about that everybody and their dog seem to have a HDTV these days especially after christmas. Even my parents have one

February 4, 2008 2:32:05 PM

nottheking said:
The problem I think you've completely missed here is that the basis for Blu-Ray's success relies ENTIRELY on the premise that high-definition movies and shows become the norm. For the vast majority of people, (of which very, very few are enthusiasts, I'd note) they simply do not own an HDTV. Hence, no matter what features Blu-Ray may claim for them, the main reason for using it in the first place is utterly moot, since they can't even display anything above 480p, if that.

Likewise, there is still another form of competition that is doing strongly for HD content, and that's downloads. While I personally like having physical media myself, I will admit that it provides the distinct advantage of not requiring any form of particular hardware: just hardware that meets the general standards for support of H.264 and HDCP.


This is a kinda silly question, don't you think? :kaola: 

Nonetheless, I'll put it this way: I don't place any real stock in opinions for the sake of opinions; I consider them pretty worthless. I recognize that it is NOT the case that "all opinions are equal." Their value is determined entirely by the strength of the facts behind them.


Well, I happen to own none of them. It is very rare for me to play a single-player game on a console; there are a few, but they are definitely not very common. When I play console games, it's almost always along with someone sitting next to me. (or elsewhere in the room, whatever) So while I've played on the three 7th-generation consoles pretty heavily, (combined, perhaps twice as much as I've played on my own PC over the past year) it's been invariably with someone else with me. If I want to play alone, I actually use the PC.
I own 4 controllers for all 3 of my consoles, and I pretty much play multiplayer games exclusively. I will however pick up a single player game on a console if it's an exclusive for that platform as I already own the hardware, otherwise I generally wouldn't bother. Halo 3 is probably my most played, for we can't get enough of Infection with zombie speed at 300%.
sanjob said:
Don't know about that everybody and their dog seem to have a HDTV these days especially after christmas. Even my parents have one
It takes time, but eventually HDTVs will be the standard.
!