The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

GTA IV episodic content exclusive to 360

1235

Posts

  • AccualtAccualt Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Also, those are ported games. The makers thought process basically involves tehm thinking of just giving it a quick port over and selling it on. Theres no desire or requirement for them to boost it up at all. I guess we'll see when MGS4 comes out if it whoops ass over the 360.
    It does

    I take it you are talking about graphics, not sales. Because MGS3, after being out for over a year in NA, sold 3.6 million units WORLDWIDE on the PS2...the system with the largest install base. Gears of War, a brand new property on a system with a much, much smaller install base, sold 4 million copies WORLDWIDE in the first five months.

    Accualt on
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Accualt wrote: »
    Also, those are ported games. The makers thought process basically involves tehm thinking of just giving it a quick port over and selling it on. Theres no desire or requirement for them to boost it up at all. I guess we'll see when MGS4 comes out if it whoops ass over the 360.
    It does

    I take it you are talking about graphics, not sales. Because MGS3, after being out for over a year in NA, sold 3.6 million units WORLDWIDE on the PS2...the system with the largest install base. Gears of War, a brand new property on a system with a much, much smaller install base, sold 4 million copies WORLDWIDE in the first five months.

    Graphics.

    But of the two, we both know which is better between MGS3 and GOW. Least you should.

    DarkWarrior on
  • fragglefartfragglefart Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    But of the two, we both know which is better between MGS3 and GOW. Least you should.

    Yup, Gears of War sure is awesome.

    fragglefart on
    fragglefart.jpg
  • DesertBoxDesertBox Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Accualt wrote: »
    Also, those are ported games. The makers thought process basically involves tehm thinking of just giving it a quick port over and selling it on. Theres no desire or requirement for them to boost it up at all. I guess we'll see when MGS4 comes out if it whoops ass over the 360.
    It does

    I take it you are talking about graphics, not sales. Because MGS3, after being out for over a year in NA, sold 3.6 million units WORLDWIDE on the PS2...the system with the largest install base. Gears of War, a brand new property on a system with a much, much smaller install base, sold 4 million copies WORLDWIDE in the first five months.

    Graphics.

    But of the two, we both know which is better between MGS3 and GOW. Least you should.

    So I assume you're saying if I prefer GoW, I'm wrong? What are your credentials to make these sorts of decisions? Are you licensed by the state? When was the last time you renewed your license?

    DesertBox on
  • KlykaKlyka DO you have any SPARE BATTERIES?Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Accualt wrote: »
    Also, those are ported games. The makers thought process basically involves tehm thinking of just giving it a quick port over and selling it on. Theres no desire or requirement for them to boost it up at all. I guess we'll see when MGS4 comes out if it whoops ass over the 360.
    It does

    I take it you are talking about graphics, not sales. Because MGS3, after being out for over a year in NA, sold 3.6 million units WORLDWIDE on the PS2...the system with the largest install base. Gears of War, a brand new property on a system with a much, much smaller install base, sold 4 million copies WORLDWIDE in the first five months.

    Graphics.

    But of the two, we both know which is better between MGS3 and GOW. Least you should.

    Ok, so he just told you off and now your argument is:

    "yeah, I may have been wrong...but that other game sure sucks,doesn't it? LOLZ!"

    Klyka on
    SC2 EU ID Klyka.110
    lTDyp.jpg
  • The CheeseThe Cheese Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    Accualt wrote: »
    Also, those are ported games. The makers thought process basically involves tehm thinking of just giving it a quick port over and selling it on. Theres no desire or requirement for them to boost it up at all. I guess we'll see when MGS4 comes out if it whoops ass over the 360.
    It does

    I take it you are talking about graphics, not sales. Because MGS3, after being out for over a year in NA, sold 3.6 million units WORLDWIDE on the PS2...the system with the largest install base. Gears of War, a brand new property on a system with a much, much smaller install base, sold 4 million copies WORLDWIDE in the first five months.

    Graphics.

    But of the two, we both know which is better between MGS3 and GOW. Least you should.

    So I assume you're saying if I prefer GoW, I'm wrong? What are your credentials to make these sorts of decisions? Are you licensed by the state? When was the last time you renewed your license?

    His Sony Fanboy license is valid through the next three console generations.

    The Cheese on
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    DarkWarrior on
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    I hate you. You just made me angry at MGS3 for assotiotiating with you. Allso MGS3 has a Coherent story? its a great story but confusing as hell.

    nightmarenny on
    Help me raise a little cash for my transition costs
    https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    Are you joking? Its the most straight-forward of the 3. What's confusing? And the weird characters are not a valid point.

    DarkWarrior on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    almost-niche MGS3
    ...MGS sold 6.6 million and 2 sold 7 million.

    Couscous on
  • DesertBoxDesertBox Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Perhaps you should look up 'coherent.' GoW's story might be simple and cliche, but its definitely coherent.

    Motherfucking monster race that lives underground rises up and wrecks our shit. Now the last bastions of humanity have found something that can put an end to those dirty motherfuckers and save humanity. Rar.

    What didn't you understand about that? Do you not get stories unless there's robots with nukes?

    DesertBox on
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Are you joking? Its the most straight-forward of the 3. What's confusing? And the weird characters are not a valid point.

    Yes its the least confusing but still. We have a bisexural sadist who wants to create a war or some nonsense. Then you have have the boss whos a triple agent and Eve who is so much of a traiter she could give Weasker a run for his money. Just keeping up with them is a hassle.

    P.S. and I swear I will never understand what the mech was supposed to do, ever.

    nightmarenny on
    Help me raise a little cash for my transition costs
    https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
  • AccualtAccualt Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Which is better is a matter of preference. I prefer MGS for story and GOW for multiplayer.
    My only point is that MGS4 is not the silver bullet to save the PS3. Will it be a system seller? Sure, but who will be buying a PS3 for MGS4? Just a niche market, many of whom are "hardcore" gamers who either have a 360 already or are die hard fanboys who were waiting for a really good reason to buy a PS3 and would never have bought a 360 anyway. It'll help bump the PS3 up but it won't put more than a scratch on the 360's lead.

    Accualt on
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Now you're using the wrong adjective entirely. The story was very coherent, what story elements there were were communicated rather clearly and easily. The real problem was that it was underdeveloped, but even that's debateable. Saying the plot of Gears of War is underdeveloped would be kind of like saying the plot of 300 was underdeveloped, that's really not the POINT of either GOW or 300. They are about balls to the wall action and ass kicking, and being all out of bubblegum. So really, given the objective of the game, I'd say it did a damn good job.

    Fiaryn on
    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Perhaps you should look up 'coherent.' GoW's story might be simple and cliche, but its definitely coherent.

    Motherfucking monster race that lives underground rises up and wrecks our shit. Now the last bastions of humanity have found something that can put an end to those dirty motherfuckers and save humanity. Rar.

    What didn't you understand about that? Do you not get stories unless there's robots with nukes?

    Underground monsters wrecking shit isn't a story. As missions progressed I didn't know why the hell I was doing what I was doing for most of the time. Why the hell was I firing some train into a hole in the ground again?

    DarkWarrior on
  • EvangirEvangir Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Perhaps you should look up 'coherent.' GoW's story might be simple and cliche, but its definitely coherent.

    Motherfucking monster race that lives underground rises up and wrecks our shit. Now the last bastions of humanity have found something that can put an end to those dirty motherfuckers and save humanity. Rar.

    What didn't you understand about that? Do you not get stories unless there's robots with nukes?

    Underground monsters wrecking shit isn't a story. As missions progressed I didn't know why the hell I was doing what I was doing for most of the time. Why the hell was I firing some train into a hole in the ground again?


    I don't think many people would argue that GeoW's story was a bit underdone, but that doesn't automatically make it an inferior game. Last I checked DarkWarrior, your opinion wasn't automatically worth more than others' opinions.

    Evangir on
    PSN/XBL/STEAM: Evangir - Starcraft 2: Bulwark.955 - Origin: Bulwark955 - Diablo 3: Bulwark#1478
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Perhaps you should look up 'coherent.' GoW's story might be simple and cliche, but its definitely coherent.

    Motherfucking monster race that lives underground rises up and wrecks our shit. Now the last bastions of humanity have found something that can put an end to those dirty motherfuckers and save humanity. Rar.

    What didn't you understand about that? Do you not get stories unless there's robots with nukes?

    Underground monsters wrecking shit isn't a story. As missions progressed I didn't know why the hell I was doing what I was doing for most of the time. Why the hell was I firing some train into a hole in the ground again?

    No I'm pretty sure that's a story. It definitely fits the definition. Whether it's a simplistic story or not is entirely besides the point of the game, as I've already mentioned.

    Fiaryn on
    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Smash Bros sold the Gamecube for most of its life and had little to no story. Story isn't the only point of a game.

    Daedalus on
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Smash Bros sold the Gamecube for most of its life and had little to no story. Story isn't the only point of a game.

    What the fuck are you talking about The Warlock? God why must you be so wrong all the time? The love triangle between Pikachu, Sheik, and Peach was fucking riveting. I CRIED MY EYES OUT.

    Fiaryn on
    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • HoukHouk Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Now you're using the wrong adjective entirely. The story was very coherent, what story elements there were were communicated rather clearly and easily. The real problem was that it was underdeveloped, but even that's debateable. Saying the plot of Gears of War is underdeveloped would be kind of like saying the plot of 300 was underdeveloped, that's really not the POINT of either GOW or 300. They are about balls to the wall action and ass kicking, and being all out of bubblegum. So really, given the objective of the game, I'd say it did a damn good job.
    you can have a properly developed story and still be about balls to the wall action and ass kicking. die hard proves this very well.

    whether or not the point of 300 or GoW was the story doesn't change the fact that the story was underdeveloped.

    and "Underground monsters wrecking shit" is definitely not a story. It's a premise, a plot, a set-up. The execution of that premise is the story. And while there wasnt any off-the-wall zonkiness in GoW, there were certainly some parts of the execution where i had to stop and wonder wtf i was doing. then i got attacked by some locust and didnt care so much anymore.

    Houk on
  • Shy GuyShy Guy Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Yeah, all I'm seeing when comparing Gears of War with Metal Gear Solid 4 is that Gears has much better textures (with some nice normal mapping on pretty much freakin' everything), more detailed character models, and nicer-looking sandbags. Yes, even the sandbags look nicer in Gears of War.

    MGS4 does win in animation though. That must be the power of Cell! Bow down?

    Seriously, if you want the best available graphics, go buy a super-expensive PC and get Crysis ( I know it hasn't been released yet, but neither has MGS4).

    Also, what is your problem, DarkWarrior? Just calm down.

    Shy Guy on
  • AshcroftAshcroft LOL The PayloadRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    syndalis wrote: »
    Ever visit VGChartz? Worldwide the PS3 is just barely behind where the 360 was at the same point in its life if you count world sales, and is WAY the hell behind in America/Europe.

    In PAL regions, the PS3 is selling faster, quite a bit faster, than the 360 did, and the 360 didn't have any competition. The PS3 sold 1,000,000 consoles (sold, not shipped) in 9 weeks in PAL regions. It took the 360 a month or so longer to do this.

    Ashcroft on
    ZD98Zka.png
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    When did I say I was wrong? If you can honestly say GOW wasn't overhyped and super-saturated and thus sold a lot as pretty much THE big name for its console compared to the more almost-niche MGS3 that was up against GTA:SA and I think Halo 2 as well? One of which was a HUGE game on the same console?

    Sure its pretty, but one is a good game, the other is a nice game lacking a coherent story.

    Now you're using the wrong adjective entirely. The story was very coherent, what story elements there were were communicated rather clearly and easily. The real problem was that it was underdeveloped, but even that's debateable. Saying the plot of Gears of War is underdeveloped would be kind of like saying the plot of 300 was underdeveloped, that's really not the POINT of either GOW or 300. They are about balls to the wall action and ass kicking, and being all out of bubblegum. So really, given the objective of the game, I'd say it did a damn good job.
    you can have a properly developed story and still be about balls to the wall action and ass kicking. die hard proves this very well.

    whether or not the point of 300 or GoW was the story doesn't change the fact that the story was underdeveloped.

    Of course you can, nothing I said at any point denies that, I merely state that that was not the point. Furthermore, the term underdeveloped I think does not really apply when the story is something attached because there has to be something there at all and for no other reason. Underdeveloped implies a need is met inadequately, and there is no need at all for story when the game is about mindless ass kicking. Complaining about the lack of story is like bitching about the lack of a story in 300 even when you have foreknowledge that this movie EXISTS for action for the sake of action.

    Fiaryn on
    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • AllforceAllforce Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Yeah so, back on topic.

    I'm willing to bet part of the 50 million entails every GTA IV ad has the "Xbox 360" splash screen at the end of it. And I'm also willing to bet it'll air at least 4 times an hour on ESPN for a month straight. Right there should ensure people say "Whoa, XBox got that? I'm sold".

    Allforce on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2007
    Allforce wrote: »
    Yeah so, back on topic.

    I'm willing to bet part of the 50 million entails every GTA IV ad has the "Xbox 360" splash screen at the end of it. And I'm also willing to bet it'll air at least 4 times an hour on ESPN for a month straight. Right there should ensure people say "Whoa, XBox got that? I'm sold".

    Rockstar would be stupid to agree with this, though. They're not going to want to do anything which impact their ability to sell GTA IV to the existing PS3 base, which means they very much are going to want to tout the fact that it's a PS3 game and a 360 game.

    Figure that 900,000 copies of the game bring in about $50M in revenue. Also figure that GTA IV is a game targeted at the mainstream, and that the mainstream market is very reliant upon ad campaigns and media blitzes. They want TV spots to scream to the casual gamers, "Look, here's a game you'll love!" If they tailor their ads such that they never mention the PS3, that would likely cost them far more than 900,000 copies, which would mean that they got a bum deal.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • HoukHouk Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Of course you can, nothing I said at any point denies that, I merely state that that was not the point. Furthermore, the term underdeveloped I think does not really apply when the story is something attached because there has to be something there at all and for no other reason. Underdeveloped implies a need is met inadequately, and there is no need at all for story when the game is about mindless ass kicking. Complaining about the lack of story is like bitching about the lack of a story in 300 even when you have foreknowledge that this movie EXISTS for action for the sake of action.
    on this there's nothing to talk about. i'm not going to convince you to care more about story in games and you're not going to convince me to care less. i see your reasoning as an excuse for developers/filmmakers to be lazy and not try to develop their ideas, when it's been proven time and again that ass-kicking mayhem and compelling storytelling can co-exist in beautiful bloody harmony. however important they think it is, they could have tried harder, ie develop it more.

    but if a player doesnt care about story in the first place, obviously theyre not gonna care how good the story actually is. so eh.

    Houk on
  • Wraith260Wraith260 Happiest Goomba! Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Allforce wrote: »
    Yeah so, back on topic.

    I'm willing to bet part of the 50 million entails every GTA IV ad has the "Xbox 360" splash screen at the end of it. And I'm also willing to bet it'll air at least 4 times an hour on ESPN for a month straight. Right there should ensure people say "Whoa, XBox got that? I'm sold".

    Rockstar would be stupid to agree with this, though. They're not going to want to do anything which impact their ability to sell GTA IV to the existing PS3 base, which means they very much are going to want to tout the fact that it's a PS3 game and a 360 game.

    Figure that 900,000 copies of the game bring in about $50M in revenue. Also figure that GTA IV is a game targeted at the mainstream, and that the mainstream market is very reliant upon ad campaigns and media blitzes. They want TV spots to scream to the casual gamers, "Look, here's a game you'll love!" If they tailor their ads such that they never mention the PS3, that would likely cost them far more than 900,000 copies, which would mean that they got a bum deal.

    as long as they make their money back, along with as much more as possible, they wont care what console the game sells most on(or by what margin). will they advertise the game was being available for both consoles? yes. they'd be stupid not to. will this stop them from mentioning that one of those version will get extra content? no, cause they're going to want to sell that too.

    i wouldn't be at all surprised if the DLC was mentioned explicitly on the 360 versions case, along with all the other selling points/crap they put on there.

    Wraith260 on
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Allforce wrote: »
    Yeah so, back on topic.

    I'm willing to bet part of the 50 million entails every GTA IV ad has the "Xbox 360" splash screen at the end of it. And I'm also willing to bet it'll air at least 4 times an hour on ESPN for a month straight. Right there should ensure people say "Whoa, XBox got that? I'm sold".

    Rockstar would be stupid to agree with this, though. They're not going to want to do anything which impact their ability to sell GTA IV to the existing PS3 base, which means they very much are going to want to tout the fact that it's a PS3 game and a 360 game.

    Figure that 900,000 copies of the game bring in about $50M in revenue. Also figure that GTA IV is a game targeted at the mainstream, and that the mainstream market is very reliant upon ad campaigns and media blitzes. They want TV spots to scream to the casual gamers, "Look, here's a game you'll love!" If they tailor their ads such that they never mention the PS3, that would likely cost them far more than 900,000 copies, which would mean that they got a bum deal.

    I agree. I doubt the TV ads are going exclude the PS3, nor will they probably mention the exclusive episodic content.

    However, I am willing to bet that in-store displays and 360 packaging will have plenty of marketing that mentions the exclusivity. Additionally, I'm sure store clerks are going to get a lot of, "Well, what's the difference between the PS3 and 360 versions?", and obviously it makes sense for them to mention it then. That question may come up quite a bit, actually, as people start to make pre-orders for the game.

    Of course, if all you have is a 360, or all you have is a PS3, then it probably doesn't matter either way. You're just going to get the version for the console you own.

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Of course you can, nothing I said at any point denies that, I merely state that that was not the point. Furthermore, the term underdeveloped I think does not really apply when the story is something attached because there has to be something there at all and for no other reason. Underdeveloped implies a need is met inadequately, and there is no need at all for story when the game is about mindless ass kicking. Complaining about the lack of story is like bitching about the lack of a story in 300 even when you have foreknowledge that this movie EXISTS for action for the sake of action.
    on this there's nothing to talk about. i'm not going to convince you to care more about story in games and you're not going to convince me to care less. i see your reasoning as an excuse for developers/filmmakers to be lazy and not try to develop their ideas, when it's been proven time and again that ass-kicking mayhem and compelling storytelling can co-exist in beautiful bloody harmony. however important they think it is, they could have tried harder, ie develop it more.

    but if a player doesnt care about story in the first place, obviously theyre not gonna care how good the story actually is. so eh.

    It's not an issue of not caring about story bud, I'm a lover of Baldurs Gate 2, Torment, Deus Ex, etc. But just like you come to those games for the story, not so much for the action, you go to other games for action and not a story. Some games do strike a balance and that's awesome, but sometimes players aren't in a mood for one or the other and thus games like Gears of War exists to satisfy those moods.

    Fiaryn on
    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • DesertBoxDesertBox Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Wraith260 wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Allforce wrote: »
    Yeah so, back on topic.

    I'm willing to bet part of the 50 million entails every GTA IV ad has the "Xbox 360" splash screen at the end of it. And I'm also willing to bet it'll air at least 4 times an hour on ESPN for a month straight. Right there should ensure people say "Whoa, XBox got that? I'm sold".

    Rockstar would be stupid to agree with this, though. They're not going to want to do anything which impact their ability to sell GTA IV to the existing PS3 base, which means they very much are going to want to tout the fact that it's a PS3 game and a 360 game.

    Figure that 900,000 copies of the game bring in about $50M in revenue. Also figure that GTA IV is a game targeted at the mainstream, and that the mainstream market is very reliant upon ad campaigns and media blitzes. They want TV spots to scream to the casual gamers, "Look, here's a game you'll love!" If they tailor their ads such that they never mention the PS3, that would likely cost them far more than 900,000 copies, which would mean that they got a bum deal.

    as long as they make their money back, along with as much more as possible, they wont care what console the game sells most on(or by what margin). will they advertise the game was being available for both consoles? yes. they'd be stupid not to. will this stop them from mentioning that one of those version will get extra content? no, cause they're going to want to sell that too.

    i wouldn't be at all surprised if the DLC was mentioned explicitly on the 360 versions case, along with all the other selling points/crap they put on there.

    Not to mention that Rockstar would prefer ppl buy the 360 version, if they have a choice, because then they can sell them the DLC. So R* can profit more off 360 versions than PS3 versions

    DesertBox on
  • BakerIsBoredBakerIsBored Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I don't have enough time to sit around and get enough achivement points for the extra content.... :P

    So instead I'll be wasting time in Lair (so long that damn game doesnt keep getting pushed back)... :D

    BakerIsBored on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2007
    At any rate, the way the deal was phrased ($25M per episode, or whatever), makes it sound like it doesn't include special advertising considerations, or anything. It sounds like MS is paying them just to produce the content and to place it exclusively on the Marketplace. If they were being paid also to tailor their ad blitz in 360-friendly ways, I suspect the details of the deal would've been expressed differently so as to conceal the fact that MS is buying ad favors.

    My guess is that MS just paid them to make the exclusive content, and that the boxes will highlight this content, but that Rockstar-made ads are not going to mention any difference between the two versions.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Wraith260Wraith260 Happiest Goomba! Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    I don't have enough time to sit around and get enough achivement points for the extra content.... :P

    i.... i don't quite get what you're saying here...O_o are you implying that the DLC will be restricted in availability based upon peoples gamerscores?

    Wraith260 on
  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Wraith260 wrote: »
    I don't have enough time to sit around and get enough achivement points for the extra content.... :P

    i.... i don't quite get what you're saying here...O_o are you implying that the DLC will be restricted in availability based upon peoples gamerscores?

    He probably thinks Gamerscore points = MS points.

    Fireflash on
    PSN: PatParadize
    Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
    Steam Friend code: 45386507
  • KevarKevar regular
    edited June 2007
    I don't have enough time to sit around and get enough achivement points for the extra content.... :P
    hahahah

    Kevar on
  • Wraith260Wraith260 Happiest Goomba! Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    At any rate, the way the deal was phrased ($25M per episode, or whatever), makes it sound like it doesn't include special advertising considerations, or anything. It sounds like MS is paying them just to produce the content and to place it exclusively on the Marketplace. If they were being paid also to tailor their ad blitz in 360-friendly ways, I suspect the details of the deal would've been expressed differently so as to conceal the fact that MS is buying ad favors.

    My guess is that MS just paid them to make the exclusive content, and that the boxes will highlight this content, but that Rockstar-made ads are not going to mention any difference between the two versions.

    as i said before, this doesn't stop MS from using GTA IV and mention of its exclusive content in future 360 ads. or on the games packaging. or in any GTA IV related material(videos/demos/etc) released on the marketplace. each/any of these combined with word of mouth will get the word out there. whether or not it does so to the level that MS wants is another matter, but they will make it an issue.

    Wraith260 on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Catharsis wrote: »
    beautiful katamari being XBLA exclusive

    Link?

    The video of the developer I saw stated that it was getting a 360 release first, but mainly because they wanted to have more time to impliment THREEAXIS functionality.

    And also, I thought it was a "real" game, not Live Arcade.

    Evander on
  • HoukHouk Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Of course you can, nothing I said at any point denies that, I merely state that that was not the point. Furthermore, the term underdeveloped I think does not really apply when the story is something attached because there has to be something there at all and for no other reason. Underdeveloped implies a need is met inadequately, and there is no need at all for story when the game is about mindless ass kicking. Complaining about the lack of story is like bitching about the lack of a story in 300 even when you have foreknowledge that this movie EXISTS for action for the sake of action.
    on this there's nothing to talk about. i'm not going to convince you to care more about story in games and you're not going to convince me to care less. i see your reasoning as an excuse for developers/filmmakers to be lazy and not try to develop their ideas, when it's been proven time and again that ass-kicking mayhem and compelling storytelling can co-exist in beautiful bloody harmony. however important they think it is, they could have tried harder, ie develop it more.

    but if a player doesnt care about story in the first place, obviously theyre not gonna care how good the story actually is. so eh.

    It's not an issue of not caring about story bud, I'm a lover of Baldurs Gate 2, Torment, Deus Ex, etc. But just like you come to those games for the story, not so much for the action, you go to other games for action and not a story. Some games do strike a balance and that's awesome, but sometimes players aren't in a mood for one or the other and thus games like Gears of War exists to satisfy those moods.
    it is an issue of not caring, though. it's laziness and underdevelopment on the creator's part. you can take the easy way out and make a crappy story that doesnt matter, or you can put in the time and effort to tell an awesome story on top of kicking alien ass. if the players don't care about story, fine, they can skip it just like they do when the story's lame. but with them out of the way, a good game can also satisfy people who want more than just stereotypical characters and trite dialogue between bouts of ass-kicking.

    games can get by without it, absolutely. it doesn't change in the least that the devs didnt put that much effort into it and didnt develop the story as much as they did the gameplay. just because you dont care doesnt mean we cant expect higher standards. bud.

    Houk on
  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Why do people bother arguing with Darkwarrior when a good majority of what he says on these kinds of subjects sounds like a massive case of sour grapes?

    Der Waffle Mous on
    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
  • Wraith260Wraith260 Happiest Goomba! Registered User regular
    edited June 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    Of course you can, nothing I said at any point denies that, I merely state that that was not the point. Furthermore, the term underdeveloped I think does not really apply when the story is something attached because there has to be something there at all and for no other reason. Underdeveloped implies a need is met inadequately, and there is no need at all for story when the game is about mindless ass kicking. Complaining about the lack of story is like bitching about the lack of a story in 300 even when you have foreknowledge that this movie EXISTS for action for the sake of action.
    on this there's nothing to talk about. i'm not going to convince you to care more about story in games and you're not going to convince me to care less. i see your reasoning as an excuse for developers/filmmakers to be lazy and not try to develop their ideas, when it's been proven time and again that ass-kicking mayhem and compelling storytelling can co-exist in beautiful bloody harmony. however important they think it is, they could have tried harder, ie develop it more.

    but if a player doesnt care about story in the first place, obviously theyre not gonna care how good the story actually is. so eh.

    It's not an issue of not caring about story bud, I'm a lover of Baldurs Gate 2, Torment, Deus Ex, etc. But just like you come to those games for the story, not so much for the action, you go to other games for action and not a story. Some games do strike a balance and that's awesome, but sometimes players aren't in a mood for one or the other and thus games like Gears of War exists to satisfy those moods.
    it is an issue of not caring, though. it's laziness and underdevelopment on the creator's part. you can take the easy way out and make a crappy story that doesnt matter, or you can put in the time and effort to tell an awesome story on top of kicking alien ass. if the players don't care about story, fine, they can skip it just like they do when the story's lame. but with them out of the way, a good game can also satisfy people who want more than just stereotypical characters and trite dialogue between bouts of ass-kicking.

    games can get by without it, absolutely. it doesn't change in the least that the devs didnt put that much effort into it and didnt develop the story as much as they did the gameplay. just because you dont care doesnt mean we cant expect higher standards. bud.

    what about those developers that don't have writers on staff? surely they'd be better off sticking with the bare-bones or no story at all than trying to shoe-horn in some poorly written, convoluted mess to justify the action.

    Wraith260 on
Sign In or Register to comment.