Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Anonymous Sony Fanboy comment #2

What HUGE rant, considering you say he is an "idiot". If so, why take him seriously? Oh I get it... I guess you want to feel good about yourself.

Because it's more fun to pick apart responses (especially the typical fare . It's my blog, and I'll rant if I want to (LOL).

You are hypocritical. You first say PS2 was feature disappointing (I'm sure that's true, that's why they lost 5 billion dollars on that console alone and sold the same amount of consoles as Nintendo did), then you say we don't need the features on PS3.

My bad, I wasn't more specific. The features the PS2 SHOULD have had (or had but had little support) were disappointing. You know, a useful hard drive, support for online gaming beyond a handful of games, Linux that worked, a working laser by at least console version four....I'll stop there.

With the PS3, do we need Tivo-functionality, a blog server, a Bluray player, and lackluster media streaming (connection speed at your home still won't matter....we are talking about a PSP with horrible wireless reception going through the internet). They haven't even proved themselves in the areas that matter yet!

Microsoft lost money on the does this prove your point? They still made a great console. The most of us PS2 boneheads didn't give them the chance that they deserved. They provided everything that Sony promised but didn't deliver with the PS2 hardware-wise. Anyway, they aren't crippled because of the loss, otherwise they wouldn't have continued on with the Xbox 360.

For your info, if you had read my earlier posts you would know I'm an ex-Sony fanboy. I got sick of the system, and bought the other two. Best move I could have made for the last generation. I've gotten more game-time out of Halo 2 than all of the Final Fantasies and Xenosagas combined (which is about 1000 hours of RPGs). I've also played Ninja Gaiden for about 4 times as many hours as I spent on God of War. The Xbox versions of games like Splinter Cell, Burnout, Need for Speed, etc render the PS2 versions obsolete (both versions exist in this house of each of these games). System link and XBL make all the difference. At least my XBL money spent is used. The $30 for my PS2 network adapter was a waste.

Obviously your opinion on almost everything PS3 is biased. At least admit that. You seem to be an Xbox lover, which is fine, but it's ridiculously obvious how partial you are. You make the false (and almost ridiculous) assumption that *every* PS2 lover (a game/RPG lover) is a PSP (gadget/multimedia) lover. Now, why would someone that loved the PS2 for the amount of games, also love the PSP? It would be more rational to love the DS. I know you'll respond with "But the 360 has many games!", but the truth is, it only has the typical FPS, an FPRPG, an FPHorror, all FP. A few sports games too. What the fuck else? Upcoming hits: GoW is another shooter. Halo 3 is another shooter.

Your thoughts are even more random than mine in this part of your whiney response. Anyway, I'm saying that from my perspective, the PS2 is good for RPGS (because the backgrounds can be static). It sucks for everything else. I guess I didn't make that clear. If a game is available on Xbox that's also available on PS2...there's really no contest in most cases.

Do I need to be more impartial? I love the Nintendo Gamecube and DS, the Xbox, and the XBox 360. I hate the PS2, but I have an old one and a couple of slims. The PS2s are the worst system I own. Sony has yet to prove to me that the Playstation brand is still worth the time of day.

All console games are typical (except for some DS games). Just because they are on the PS2 doesn't make them any more original. Devil May Cry and God of War are action platformers, Gran Turismo is a boring racing simulator (and so is Forza), and Metal Gear Solid is a silly stealth action game. I don't see what you're getting at.

Nobody needs your assessment on Next-gen discs, as you are not a specialist on it (where are your credentials?). Next-gen resolutions need not artefacts on screen, and Next-gen discs need support from hollywood. If you don't want to pay 30 dollars for a "10 dollar movie" (maybe you meant 20, as almost no new movie costs 10 dollars). As simple as waiting for the format to become cheap. Also, Microsoft neglected the possibility to add content to a game just in case. They could have either chosen HD-DVD, or better yet, a BIG HARD DRIVE. None of them is there. On Sony's machine, you'll have both, each for some particular use, so game experiences will be enhanced. Cut-scenes, cut-scenes, cut-scenes. A good game is a mix of everything, not "either or". You don't simply discard cut-scenes because there are many gamers that like it. If you don't, don't worry. You won't see them much on 360 anyway.

Asking for credentials is a bit silly coming from somone who thinks cut-scenes still have to be pre-rendered and take up gigabytes and gigabytes of space.

Anyway, Hollywood isn't interested in HD-DVD or Bluray because of HD...they only care for their ridiculous DRM that only prevents the "good consumer" from acceptable practices. Personal backup copies are legal, but selling and redistributing unauthorized copies are not, but DRM doesn't stop that from happening. DRM goes after the consumer, not the pirates (they will find ways to copy anything).

As for artifacts, most people don't even notice them. Only video elitists that know what to look for do.

Back on track: you are reading MY blog, and taking it personal. That's obviously a fault on your part.

Most Sony-cultists still poorly attempt to retort with unintentionally amusing rants. Understand that I don't make money blogging; I say what I want and how I feel about things in the industry. If you are going to say something captivating, then do it. I actually want this to happen...but I usually get stupid whiney comments like this one...

On Bluray: it's probably safe to assume you haven't programmed in Java before; I have. So you don't understand one of the most important reasons why I am so against Bluray (besides the fact that a 50GB red laser disc can be made...EVD). Java sucks, and that's what they use for it. If you like links, read some of these:

Bluray problems

Bluray and HD-DVD is a futile battle

Bluray not up to snuff (some info no longer accurate)...XML vs Java...I'll take XML

HP says, "No iHD? F U!"

"The problem is that the jump from progressive scan DVD (480p) to Blu-ray and HD-DVD at 720p or 1080p just isn't that great, even on a 46" display."

Only marginally better picture than DVD

The important parts to notice is when they say HD-DVD and Bluray are both only marginally better than what we have now. They mean marginally better than a progressive scan or upscaling DVD player. A slightly sharper image? Come on...they'll have to do better than that for movies. If we end up with one format or the other but just using the DVD layer in the hybrid discs...

Okay, sometimes a new DVD is $15-20. I never buy them at that price because I can always find them for $10-12 in a month or so after its release. And while I'm at it, I should let everyone know that I hate movies for the most part. That's why I play video games.

Alright, the last half of that poorly assembled paragraph is definitely "special".

Stop acting like the 360 hard drive isn't upgradeable. 60GB isn't that much either, so don't get your panties in a bind. If we are supposed to be able to record video (in HD) regularly, then we'd want more than 60GB. Video eats up space.

Edit 06/16/06: Sony has since announced that the base PS3 costs $499 and only has a 20GB drive. No argument required.

Cut-scenes? Um, why not just use real-time now? They can do that you know with either the PS3 or the 360. Then the space won't be necessary for cut-scenes. Also, you are dreaming if you think publishers and developers are going to support the resources it would take to produce games of 20GB+. Their returns are not high enough to justify that kind of spending.

Backwards compatibility is very important on any console since the PS2. As a PS1 and PS2 game owner, I find it important to be able to play all the resident evil versions, all the final fantasy versions, and all the metal gear solids. At LEAST. And any other game, just in case. Not just "the best sellers". Where the hell are the backwards compatible quality fighters on 360? And by that, I don't mean DOA, I mean Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter, as examples.

Stop pretending like you play those games all the time. Yes, I'm playing FF8 right now, but that's 5 years after the fact. I could live without playing it, or I could play it on my old system.

Your arguments are again not considering the audience. I think Metal Gear Solid is too silly compared to Splinter Cell. I've not mentioned it, but I didn't like ANY of the Resident Evils EXCEPT for RE4 (on the Gamecube...the PS2 version is ugly). I like Final Fantasy 8. 7 is okay, but I probably won't ever play it again. 9 is the worst Final Fantasy to come on disc in my opinion.

Um...Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter are going to be on XBLA WITH ONLINE PLAY...bad examples. With online play, and being direct ports of the arcade versions, it kind of negates the importance of having the shoddy PSX versions, now doesn't it? I would say Xmen vs Street Fighter is important, but you can't switch to the secondary character (I'm still mad about that...). I'd rather play it through MAME (with online support), thanks.

MK for XBLA with online support...
SF2 for XBLA with online support...

I figured getting 3 different magazines and reading a dozen blogs and news sites regularly was good enough to be "informed". Should I assume that you must get 12 different gaming mags and read the ENTIRE internet every day then? There's no way I could be informed compared to that!

If you owned an Xbox 360, you would know they are still working on backwards compatility. Emulation is good, so I don't have to have old hardware inside my new hardware to run games I won't play (talking about the PS2 again if you didn't notice).

(Edit: The PS3 will use software emulation as well, so 100% BC isn't likely IMHO).

1GBPS bandwidth is already being offered in Japan and Sweden for the equivalent of 60 bucks a month.

Why is everyone on this trip? This doesn't matter. We're talking about a 10Mbps 802.11b connection from a PSP. Reliable bandwidth is a problem with wireless as well. Your connection at home isn't the bottleneck. Your PSP is. This is a problem with not having the right hardware for media streaming to begin with.


$500 PS3 At Launch (Anything higher is suicide)

WiFi enabled $0
Backwards Compatible $0
Unified Service for gaming $0
Blu-ray playability $0
Better Japanese Support $0
60 GB HDD $0

Sorry about the $500 assumption. It just makes the most sense to me. Kutaragi says it will be expensive, so I'm positive it will be more than the Xbox 360, but hopefully semi-reasonable.

WiFi is essentially for the PSP's connection. Most of you guys have never tried to online game with a computer or console over a WiFi connection (because you use PS2s). It sucks. Even at 802.11g. I'm glad the 360 doesn't come with it, because it's near worthless. Wire your damn houses with Cat 5e/6. It's worth it. I'll post a pic of my network setup if it makes you feel better. Even if I wanted wireless, at least the 360's would be upgradeable (802.11n will be here someday)!

Bluray is worthless to me. You apparently welcome the scamtastic format (HD-DVD is scamtastic, too). Why are you quoting it to ME as a pro? Consider your audience.

Japanese support? Don't assume the PS2's hold on that market will continue. But *gasp* you are making assumptions, too. Guilty. Caught you. Don't EVER underestimate Microsoft. As far as Nintendo, they may just get consumer confidence back. They've got mine.

You know why the "unified service for gaming" is $0? It's the same damn thing as PS2's online service except it has a friend's list. Didn't I say this already? It's the same crap as before! If you want to put up with it for free, knock yourself out. I'll pay the "wallet-breaking" $8 a month for a good service. I don't think my girlfriend would be happy without it...she's on Live everyday.

I would hope they would provide a bigger hard drive at launch. Aren't they expected to? And for those who actually need it, there will be bigger 360 drives in the future. So should all the 360 fanboys talk shit when Premiums come out with a bigger hard drive than the PS3 does at the time? Come on. We'll have been playing Next Gen games for an entire year while you weirdos are holding out. And my 20GB HDD still won't be filled up by then.

When I complain about "we have to pay for" with the PS3, I'm mostly talking about the required features. The games will cost more because they are on Bluray discs. Plus they have to recoup costs from the resources it took to create these features. They'll find a way to get it out of us. Anyway, if they cut the worthless features out, the PS3 could be cheaper all-around.

$300 X360 At PS3 Launch

20GB... Oops.. I meant 13GB HDD
10% Backwards Compatibility (therefore, there's a loss, who knows how many Xbox 1 games you have... there are few good ones anyway)
HD-DVD add on $200
WiFi add-on $100
Bigger hard drives ...
Unified Gaming Service $60

I don't want WiFi or HD-DVD. YOU DO. So how is that more expensive for me? I use 2GB right now of my 360's hard drive. I'm not complaining. Streaming music works quite well, so I don't even have to copy files over. Maybe you like having multiple copies of your music?

7GB of the hard drive is for that backwards compability thing you think is so important. See, the PS3 won't need to reserve HDD space because the PS2's hard drive was required by a whole whopping 1 GAME (FFXI, which you might as well play on the PC or 360 anyway).

So which is more expensive, smartass? Sure, if you just want gaming, 360 might be cheaper. But many homes don't have their console next to a PC, so a WiFi adapter will cost you 100 for 360. Online Gaming? 60 bucks extra (just for one year). I don't care how much "better" it is than PS3, as long as it is comparable I'm through. And that's still counting out BC for 360, and the possibility of ending up needing a bigger hard drive because games that might need to fit on a single disc could end up needing some extra content...

You obviously don't online game if you are saying that. PS2 online sucks, and they are going to stick with that format and add a few expected features that don't improve performance. Good luck with that.

Just to refresh your memory, BC for PS2 was huge, and just as people "don't want to spend 500 on a console", people also "don't want to waste 500 dollars worth of last gen games due to lack of BC". Also, for people to fall into the "HD realm of 360", it would have been very appealing to include HD movie playability out of the box (for a mass produced format), not just HD gaming.

It's not a waste. Keep the old system (how is that wasting money?), why is this such a hard notion? Besides, Microsoft is still working on BC. Why do you keep going on about BC? Do you even have a 360...or an Xbox for that matter? My point is, I play PS1 games about never. Actually, I can't stand to play PS2 games that much either because I find them extremely inferior and the controller is annoying.

Now, saying "PS3 *will* be disappointing like PS2" is just being plain biased and preconceiving, since PS2 didn't disappoint anyway. It had all the exclusives anyone could have wanted. That's why it sold so much, game over.

The PS2 WAS a disappointment. Read some of the other posts. Many of the gaming sites were disappointed with the PS2 because failed to perform to the hype. All of the promised features never happened, or support was dropped. I'm not going to type these out again. The PS2 sold because the PS1 did so well, and they have the exclusives. Not because the PS2 hardware was any good...because it's not. It's horrible. Read previous posts to see why.

Edit: I better provide some links...

Unofficial 2/5 Stars

Unofficial 3/5 Stars

Dreamcast has the games (at the time)

I don't have any more time. There's more, and even some official disappointments with the jaggies and graphics. Google terms: ps2 playstation hype dreamcast disappointment failure

By the way, the only JRPG maker for 360 seems to be Mistwalker, and who knows how good they'll be. 3 titles only won't make a difference. I'm sure "FromSoftware" is sick of the underachieving sales of Enchant Arm, and are not eager to make another RPG exclusive to 360. Who knows, it might get ported to PS3. The only announced titles made by Squenix for 360 are a 4 year old game and an(other) FPS. You don't start in Japan without an original game from them. LOL

"Informed", yeah right. You crack me up, buddy.

Sadly, it's obvious you don't know what you are talking about either. Sounds to me like you are just defending Sony's bullshit. I won't. Nintendo and Microsoft haven't failed to meet my expectations with the Gamecube, DS, XBox, and 360 so far. And they talk to us about gaming, not the elitist business crap the Sony reps run their mouths about when it comes to the Playstation.

You say that I assume PS gamers only like RPGs...and here you come with the RPG crap again. Make up your mind! Anyway, the 360 will get its share. The 360 is much better poised in the market than the Xbox was. Stop trying to discount MS because they aren't going to fall over as easily as Sega did.

Anyway, stop bitching if you don't like my blog. If you don't like it, stop reading it, and wasting time complaining. If you want to bitch, you better have something provocative to say. I'm still waiting for something thought-provoking from a Sony fanboy. So far, it's mostly regurgitation of Sony's fallacies and innuendos.

You crack me up.


Post a Comment

<< Home