Options

Metal Gear Solid 4 delayed to Q2 of 2008: Inflammatory Thread Title Here

1235714

Posts

  • Options
    slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    If you ask me, $400 is not reasonable. It only looks reasonable after having stared at a $600 price tag for about a year.

    Actually, I agree. I should've said "more reasonable." :P

    edit; agh, actually, I did. okay, well, that's what I mean anyway

    slash000 on
  • Options
    DirtyDirty Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    So, how 'bout them Guns Of The Patriots.

    That's some serious firepower.

    Dirty on
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago.

    Microsoft charged $600 for a game console? Huh, never knew that. :P

    Seriously, I know what you're getting at. No company is perfect, and Nintendo and Microsoft have fucked up plenty in the past. But really, Sony's managed to compress an impressive number of fuckups in a short amount of time.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Really the only way I know Sony has fucked up so much is becuase I read it here. If I never surfed the web and just played my PS3 I wouldve never guessed Sony was in my garage running a methlab while prosituting runaway boys.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies. That tends to not have anything to do with a purchase decision for most people. If the PS3 were $300 right now, I'd buy one immediately. But I'd still have the attitude of, "You see, that's what people wanted this whole time. A reasonable price. We don't give a shit if it's the almighty Playstation brand so much as we care about price and good games. Geniuses."

    slash000 on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Dirty wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    To be fair, though, this isn't a "MGS4 thread" so much as it is a "MGS4 is delayed" thread.

    I mean, if this were a thread devoted to MGS4 discussion; about story, characters, events, plot stuff, gameplay, videos, trailers, previews, impressions, etc; yeah, all the blah blah about sales charts predicitions about sales and multiplatform stuff would be out of place.

    It still happens. I think the only time we were able to get a decent thread going without getting derailed by all the PS3vs360 B.S. was to make it a general discussion of the entire series, not just the PS3-exclusive MGS4.

    Okay, but you should really blame Konami and Sony, not us. The reason people keep saying the same shit is because we keep following the same patterns of logic and Konami and Sony have shown absolutely no sign that they are doing anything to alter their illogical behavior to match the much more obvious logical patterns they should be following.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Somehow I'm not surprised that you don't care about meanspiritedness.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Options
    slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.



    OK, now we're starting to veer off of the same page when we say 'mean spiritedness.'

    When I say that, I'm just talking about the kind of stuff relating to sales and such.

    Not all of the lolsony stuff. That can indeed get out of hand. I certainly try to avoid at all possible to piss on a company just 'because.' I certainly don't want to do that. Believe me.

    slash000 on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Grow thicker skin then.

    Honestly, I'm about as tired of "waaah I'm tired of 'lolsony'" as you must be of "lolsony" itself.

    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Grow thicker skin then.

    Honestly, I'm about as tired of "waaah I'm tired of 'lolsony'" as you must be of "lolsony" itself.

    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    They choose to speak out in any sony related thread though. Even if its a game that is on the PS3. I really don't see how you can be AS tired of "waaah I'm tired of lolsony" as I am of "lolsony" when its a 90/10 ratio of such. And people hate the PS3? Why exactly? What did the PS3 do? It didn';t price itself. Its a solid and capable machine that I don't have to worry about. Sony's adverts and CEO speeches don't give people the right to bitch about the console in every SINGLE sony related thread. It gets old. It got old. It died.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    RoanthRoanth Registered User regular
    edited December 2007

    I was referring to failures in general. And not just MS but retailers everywhere that offered any kind of warranty on the things. Its hard at the moment to deal with customers who come to use with their failed Core's and we cannot replace it because all we have is Arcades, and it is all we will now ever have.

    Saying they will release it for $200 is a bit of a stretch and pure baseless speculation. By which I mean good fucking luck with it ever coming true. Dropping the Xbox like a bad rash was basically the only way to go. A next gen wasn't far off since PS2 had been out like hwat? 6 years at that point? I honestly hope they try it and PS3s stable hardware and Wiis popularity fuck them right in the ass because no, we do not need new gens every 5 years and unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work and they won't just absorb the cost of keeping them in there either.

    The $200 price point is pure baseless speculation, which was done in response to your own assertions that had no facts behind them except for your opinion (as I pointed out). Refrain from making shit up and so will I. As other have pointed out, your personal dislike of a 5-year cycle is, again, your opinion. But thanks for letting us know what "we" need. You have obviously bought into the future proofing concept behind Sony's expensive technology. Hooray for you. If I had shelled out that kind of jack for a system I know I would want to hang on to it as long as possible. I am sure that in a technology industry like gaming there are plenty of examples where hardware didn't become obsolete after 10 years.

    Also, your obsession with the need for the next Xbox to have full 360 backwards compatibility in light of the new PS3's lack of any backwards compatibility is quite frankly hilarious. Did I miss the post where you ripped into Sony for offering a SKU with the lack of what you view to be one of the primary functions of a new piece of hardware? Software emulation isn't ideal obviously but it is a viable alternative to provide the backwards compatibility without expensive extra hardware. Also, if the next Xbox stuck with the same hardware manufacturers there is a good chance they could provide full backwards compatibility without the need for old hardware. Again, you are positing insurmountable hurdles and problems when you really have no idea what the actual situation will be like. If you want to make statements like these, at least insert the words "likely" or "in my opinion". It is hard to take you seriously when you make statements of fact like "we do not need new gens every 5 years" and "unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work" (unless you can see into the future, in which case I apologize), because we all know that the 360 can't play and oXbox games due to its lack of oXbox hardware.

    Roanth on
  • Options
    AccualtAccualt Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Old got old.

    Accualt on
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Roanth wrote: »

    I was referring to failures in general. And not just MS but retailers everywhere that offered any kind of warranty on the things. Its hard at the moment to deal with customers who come to use with their failed Core's and we cannot replace it because all we have is Arcades, and it is all we will now ever have.

    Saying they will release it for $200 is a bit of a stretch and pure baseless speculation. By which I mean good fucking luck with it ever coming true. Dropping the Xbox like a bad rash was basically the only way to go. A next gen wasn't far off since PS2 had been out like hwat? 6 years at that point? I honestly hope they try it and PS3s stable hardware and Wiis popularity fuck them right in the ass because no, we do not need new gens every 5 years and unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work and they won't just absorb the cost of keeping them in there either.

    The $200 price point is pure baseless speculation, which was done in response to your own assertions that had no facts behind them except for your opinion (as I pointed out). Refrain from making shit up and so will I. As other have pointed out, your personal dislike of a 5-year cycle is, again, your opinion. But thanks for letting us know what "we" need. You have obviously bought into the future proofing concept behind Sony's expensive technology. Hooray for you. If I had shelled out that kind of jack for a system I know I would want to hang on to it as long as possible. I am sure that in a technology industry like gaming there are plenty of examples where hardware didn't become obsolete after 10 years.

    Also, your obsession with the need for the next Xbox to have full 360 backwards compatibility in light of the new PS3's lack of any backwards compatibility is quite frankly hilarious. Did I miss the post where you ripped into Sony for offering a SKU with the lack of what you view to be one of the primary functions of a new piece of hardware? Software emulation isn't ideal obviously but it is a viable alternative to provide the backwards compatibility without expensive extra hardware. Also, if the next Xbox stuck with the same hardware manufacturers there is a good chance they could provide full backwards compatibility without the need for old hardware. Again, you are positing insurmountable hurdles and problems when you really have no idea what the actual situation will be like. If you want to make statements like these, at least insert the words "likely" or "in my opinion". It is hard to take you seriously when you make statements of fact like "we do not need new gens every 5 years" and "unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work" (unless you can see into the future, in which case I apologize), because we all know that the 360 can't play and oXbox games due to its lack of oXbox hardware.


    Tl; dr.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    RoanthRoanth Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Roanth wrote: »

    I was referring to failures in general. And not just MS but retailers everywhere that offered any kind of warranty on the things. Its hard at the moment to deal with customers who come to use with their failed Core's and we cannot replace it because all we have is Arcades, and it is all we will now ever have.

    Saying they will release it for $200 is a bit of a stretch and pure baseless speculation. By which I mean good fucking luck with it ever coming true. Dropping the Xbox like a bad rash was basically the only way to go. A next gen wasn't far off since PS2 had been out like hwat? 6 years at that point? I honestly hope they try it and PS3s stable hardware and Wiis popularity fuck them right in the ass because no, we do not need new gens every 5 years and unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work and they won't just absorb the cost of keeping them in there either.

    The $200 price point is pure baseless speculation, which was done in response to your own assertions that had no facts behind them except for your opinion (as I pointed out). Refrain from making shit up and so will I. As other have pointed out, your personal dislike of a 5-year cycle is, again, your opinion. But thanks for letting us know what "we" need. You have obviously bought into the future proofing concept behind Sony's expensive technology. Hooray for you. If I had shelled out that kind of jack for a system I know I would want to hang on to it as long as possible. I am sure that in a technology industry like gaming there are plenty of examples where hardware didn't become obsolete after 10 years.

    Also, your obsession with the need for the next Xbox to have full 360 backwards compatibility in light of the new PS3's lack of any backwards compatibility is quite frankly hilarious. Did I miss the post where you ripped into Sony for offering a SKU with the lack of what you view to be one of the primary functions of a new piece of hardware? Software emulation isn't ideal obviously but it is a viable alternative to provide the backwards compatibility without expensive extra hardware. Also, if the next Xbox stuck with the same hardware manufacturers there is a good chance they could provide full backwards compatibility without the need for old hardware. Again, you are positing insurmountable hurdles and problems when you really have no idea what the actual situation will be like. If you want to make statements like these, at least insert the words "likely" or "in my opinion". It is hard to take you seriously when you make statements of fact like "we do not need new gens every 5 years" and "unless they fit a good chunk of the 360 into their new console, 360 games aren't gonna just work" (unless you can see into the future, in which case I apologize), because we all know that the 360 can't play and oXbox games due to its lack of oXbox hardware.


    Tl; dr.

    Orly?

    (someone get me the ascii picture)

    Roanth on
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Grow thicker skin then.

    Honestly, I'm about as tired of "waaah I'm tired of 'lolsony'" as you must be of "lolsony" itself.

    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    In every thread? For 20 pages? I'm tired of lolsony becuase its fucking retarded. It doesnt apply anymore... 6 or 7 months ago lolsony brought up some good points. Sony has addressed most of these points (Price cuts, better game catalog) but lolsony seems to adapt and latch on to the most inane and ridiculous things to stay alive. Let it die like any shitty meme that has run its course.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    The PS3 is a decent system now. There are a couple of exclusive games that I would love to buy and more that I would like to rent if I owned the system. The problem is that in the eyes of most people, the 360 and Wii are just plain better: lower price and more games.

    Now, the gaming industry is very much the winners win more sort of industry. Have a successful year and more companies make games for your console which leads to more success in the future. Now the PS3 is substantially behind in console sales compared to the 360 and Wii. Not only that, but the gap is widening every month. Something big needs to happen soon for Sony to have a chance at avoiding 3rd place and I don't see it happening. The price drop has helped some, but even with the price drop, the 360 and Wii are each selling substantially better.

    If MGS4 had somehow managed to come out this year, I think Sony might have had a chance at second place, but even that would probably not be enough in the face of the Halo 3 + Mass Effect assault. I'm thinking anything short of MGS4 this Christmas and Final Fantasy XIII soon after (or GTA4 locked in as a PS3 exclusive) wouldn't have been enough.

    The PS3 will remain in 3rd place and Sony will be the first of the 3 companies to release a new game console (if they don't just drop out of the business altogether). Of course, that's just sales; depending on your tastes, the PS3 could be your favorite.

    RainbowDespair on
  • Options
    LotharsLothars Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Grow thicker skin then.

    Honestly, I'm about as tired of "waaah I'm tired of 'lolsony'" as you must be of "lolsony" itself.

    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    In every thread? For 20 pages? I'm tired of lolsony becuase its fucking retarded. It doesnt apply anymore... 6 or 7 months ago lolsony brought up some good points. Sony has addressed most of these points (Price cuts, better game catalog) but lolsony seems to adapt and latch on to the most inane and ridiculous things to stay alive. Let it die like any shitty meme that has run its course.

    I agree 100% with you, it's annoying but of course it's not gonna stop anytime soon which is a shame.

    Lothars on
  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Someone not buying a console becuase of what the mean ol' corporation has done is retarded. For every underhanded, stupid thing Sony has done, Microsoft has beat them to it and done it years ago. But still, most of you eat up the 360 which is fine becuase it has a bitchin catalog, good price and decent online platform.

    Mega corporations like Sony and Microsoft didnt become huge and successful by being nice to people.


    Nobody isn't buying the systems because the companies are arrogant. They're not buying the systems because of the price and the increasing loss of exclusives.

    The company's arrogance is the reason why there may be a 'mean spirited' tone to some people's replies.

    Yeah but Sony don't hang around here giving a shit about Cloudeagle's opinions. All the 'meanspiritedness' does is piss off and bring down those who like the respective console.

    Grow thicker skin then.

    Honestly, I'm about as tired of "waaah I'm tired of 'lolsony'" as you must be of "lolsony" itself.

    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    In every thread? For 20 pages? I'm tired of lolsony becuase its fucking retarded. It doesnt apply anymore... 6 or 7 months ago lolsony brought up some good points. Sony has addressed most of these points (Price cuts, better game catalog) but lolsony seems to adapt and latch on to the most inane and ridiculous things to stay alive. Let it die like any shitty meme that has run its course.

    You know, at first lolsony was just lolsony. Now it seems to include any anti-sony talk, even if it's reasonable sale predictions for the future. Which is surprising to me, considering that since Sony is in third place after being in first for two generations. Why should people not still be talking about this? Why should this discussion be shelved?

    Because it hurts your feelings? Why do talk of sales and such hurt your feelings? Why is it so wrong to go "hey, this game isn't doing as well as it should have" or "Hey, this PS3 exclusive game got delayed. I wonder what that means for Sony"? Because as far as I know, the last several pages have been discussion, not lolsony.

    Maybe you just need to grow some thicker skin? Because calling this kind of discussion lolsony is basically demanding that everyone treats the PS3 and it's games like they're selling well.

    Death of Rats on
    No I don't.
  • Options
    cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    Very true, but we have at least once a week where someone will start a thread like this (Some setback for Sony or a Sony exclusive game) and instead of talking about it in a mature matter, in degenerates into sales figures, cock waving and people dancing on the PS3's supposed grave. It gets tiresome and if you guys have a right to "speak out" against Sony for 20 pages in 2 threads a week, I have a right to come in here and tell you you're full of shit.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    C'mon, seriously. When people literally type out 'lolsony' they're joking about the reaction that had been an almost monthly thing last year, and it's not meant to be taken seriously. Kind of like 'nintendo=doomed.' Not many people say 'lolsony' with any degree of seriousness. Yes, I can totally understand and genuinely feel bad for anyone in a Sony related thread that gets jumped on by people coming in and saying non-constructive and unwarranted negative things about the company which really have nothing to do with the system itself or the games.


    The PS3 is a solid system that is reasonably powerful with great games like Ratchet/uncharted/resistance/warhawk/hs/the multiplat games. The price and the company mishaps do not change that.

    As far as sales and predictions about where exclusives will go, and third party financial performance, you'll have to start considering hard numbers. You have to. Otherwise your speculation begins to look ridiculous. And to say that someone claiming that Sony looks pretty bleak in these areas is not an unwarranted statement and shouldn't even be taken as 'lolsony,' because it's a reasonable and objective statement that actually is supported by evidence. If someone says, "No, I think sony'll come back and win this generation," they're going to have to offer of some rational basis, some reason, for that claim or else they may as well have said nothing. That sort of thing invites sales figures and trends and historical patterns.



    I'll speak for myself when I say that I want a PS3 and think it's a good machine and I have strong doubts that MGS4 will ever go to another platform. Just because I want one doesn't mean I feel like the price is justified, yet, nor do I think it will sell particularly awesome, at least not well enough to eclipse the other two machines any time in the near future. The attitude of a company rarely prevents me from buying a good product of theirs.


    cloudeagle wrote: »
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    Very true, but we have at least once a week where someone will start a thread like this (Some setback for Sony or a Sony exclusive game) and instead of talking about it in a mature matter, in degenerates into sales figures, cock waving and people dancing on the PS3's supposed grave. It gets tiresome and if you guys have a right to "speak out" against Sony for 20 pages in 2 threads a week, I have a right to come in here and tell you you're full of shit.


    Has that happened, here?

    Who's dancing on Sony's nonexistent grave? Where has the talk become immature?

    How is supporting an opinion with facts a degeneration of a discussion?

    slash000 on
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    Very true, but we have at least once a week where someone will start a thread like this (Some setback for Sony or a Sony exclusive game) and instead of talking about it in a mature matter, in degenerates into sales figures, cock waving and people dancing on the PS3's supposed grave. It gets tiresome and if you guys have a right to "speak out" against Sony for 20 pages in 2 threads a week, I have a right to come in here and tell you you're full of shit.


    Has that happened, here?

    Who's dancing on Sony's nonexistent grave? Where has the talk become immature?

    How is supporting an opinion with facts a degeneration of a discussion?

    Around page 4 is when the sales figures came in and page 5 is when the "Not even this could save the PS3" talk came in as if the PS3 needed to be "saved". As for immature this has been better than most but any 360 vs. PS3 thread is immature by default.

    Theres nothing wrong with using sales figures as facts to back an argument but we have a giant thread just for that. We dont need to be reminded about how much the PS3 isnt selling when were talking about a slight delay in MGS4.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    To be fair, Metal Gear Solid really has picked up a reputation as being the game that will "save" the PS3... it's something people supporting the console cite first whenever system wars were declared. (Sorry, can't resist Futurama references.) It's the first expected killer app. So to an extent, it's only a little natural to want to predict how this will affect Sony's fortunes. There's absurdly high expectations.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    Very true, but we have at least once a week where someone will start a thread like this (Some setback for Sony or a Sony exclusive game) and instead of talking about it in a mature matter, in degenerates into sales figures, cock waving and people dancing on the PS3's supposed grave. It gets tiresome and if you guys have a right to "speak out" against Sony for 20 pages in 2 threads a week, I have a right to come in here and tell you you're full of shit.


    Has that happened, here?

    Who's dancing on Sony's nonexistent grave? Where has the talk become immature?

    How is supporting an opinion with facts a degeneration of a discussion?

    Around page 4 is when the sales figures came in and page 5 is when the "Not even this could save the PS3" talk came in as if the PS3 needed to be "saved". As for immature this has been better than most but any 360 vs. PS3 thread is immature by default.

    Theres nothing wrong with using sales figures as facts to back an argument but we have a giant thread just for that. We dont need to be reminded about how much the PS3 isnt selling when were talking about a slight delay in MGS4.


    We do when people cite MGS4 as the game that will "save the PS3". You know, when people go "Well, yeah? Those are sales numbers from now! Just you wait until MGS4 and FFXIII come out!".

    How can you expect people to not bring the current situation into a thread about a game that is suppose to be the "savior" of the PS3? For a year I've been hearing people say that things will change once MGS4 is released. This makes it so any non-story discussion of MGS4 is going to turn into a "will it save the PS3" thread.

    Death of Rats on
    No I don't.
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Exactly, I just think this talk of the PS3 needing to be "saved" is nonsense. First of all, its right on track with what the 360 sold its first year, and the game industry has exploded to a point where third place might still net you 30-40 million units sold in the end... fuck it, money for all. A good 3 way dance forces these guys to compete making prices lower and more services available.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    slash000 wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    That's a good point. Criticism of Sony =/= lolsony.

    Very true, but we have at least once a week where someone will start a thread like this (Some setback for Sony or a Sony exclusive game) and instead of talking about it in a mature matter, in degenerates into sales figures, cock waving and people dancing on the PS3's supposed grave. It gets tiresome and if you guys have a right to "speak out" against Sony for 20 pages in 2 threads a week, I have a right to come in here and tell you you're full of shit.


    Has that happened, here?

    Who's dancing on Sony's nonexistent grave? Where has the talk become immature?

    How is supporting an opinion with facts a degeneration of a discussion?

    Around page 4 is when the sales figures came in and page 5 is when the "Not even this could save the PS3" talk came in as if the PS3 needed to be "saved". As for immature this has been better than most but any 360 vs. PS3 thread is immature by default.

    Theres nothing wrong with using sales figures as facts to back an argument but we have a giant thread just for that. We dont need to be reminded about how much the PS3 isnt selling when were talking about a slight delay in MGS4.


    Then comes the "Well MGS doesn't sell, it'll need better exclusives than that, hell it needs ANY good games, lolz".

    Paraphrasing the dickishry in some ways but its largely intact. True, MGS might not have the appeal of Halo to sell wallets, keyrings, laser tag games, little klix action figures, themed controllers and ugly colour-schemed consoles but eh, it does sell and I think people underestimate it mostly because they just don't particularly like it.

    Even worse they consider the 3 mill average they sell to the 100 mill PS2 install base which doesn't work. Doesn't GTA do like 11-15 mill? More for GT? 3 mill is a LOT of people and this MGS looks easily best. Though I doubt they'll have villains like Foxhound. God i loved them.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Exactly, I just think this talk of the PS3 needing to be "saved" is nonsense. First of all, its right on track with what the 360 sold its first year, and the game industry has exploded to a point where third place might still net you 30-40 million units sold in the end... fuck it, money for all. A good 3 way dance forces these guys to compete making prices lower and more services available.

    To which someone is going to say "but it came out a year later, so those aren't good numbers"

    To which someone will say "but Sony is on a 10 year console life cycle"

    To which someone will say "if the PS3 was successful, yeah, but I don't see that happening"

    to which someone will say "but it's tracking as good as the 360 in it's first year!"

    to which someone will say "again, it came out a year later, and just to further bring this out, the 360 had Gears of War it's first christmas. What does the PS3 have?"

    to which someone will say "Uncharted and Ratchet and Clank!"

    to which someone will say "Those games aren't charting well. While they're good games (arguably better than GoW), they're not going to boost sales the same way that GoW did"

    to which someone will say "But the PS3 has already had a price drop, that combined with the games = more sales"

    to which someone will say "Well, the PS3's price cut was down to what the 360 originally started out at... Also it came at the cost of BC."

    to which someone will say "Losing BC allowed them to lower the price, which is all people wanted!"

    to which someone will say "But not at the loss of features!"

    to which someone will say "Why are you picking on Sony, you must be one of those lolsony crowds! Get off my internet!"

    to which someone will say "But we've been having a discussion, this isn't lolsony. This is me stating my standpoint and you stating yours. Don't take it so personally!"

    Death of Rats on
    No I don't.
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Gears of war is awesome. (Thank god for the PC port)

    And as for that little mini discussion thats fine... in the sales thread... which was designed for that stuff. The problem I have is that it pops up in almost every PS3/PS3 game thread and its redundant and unneccesary.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    Radikal_DreamerRadikal_Dreamer Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Did Heavenly Sword alone save the PS3? No
    Did Warhawk alone save the PS3? No
    Did Ratchet and Clank alone save the PS3? No
    Did Uncharted alone save the PS3? No
    Will Haze alone save the PS3? No
    Will Killzone 2 alone save the PS3? No
    Will LittleBigPlanet alone save the PS3? No
    Will Metal Gear Solid 4 alone save the PS3? No
    Will the introduction of Home with Live-like features for absolutely free alone save the PS3? No
    Will the TWO Final Fantasy exclusives alone save the PS3? No
    Will Tekken 6 alone save the PS3? No
    Will Gran Turismo 5 alone save the PS3? No
    Will the fact that the PS3 can play a helluva lot of big name multiplatform games like Grand Theft Auto, etc, alone save the PS3? No

    Will I have a hell of a lot of fun with my PS3? Yes
    Will all these things combined get a few more people to buy a PS3? Yes

    I don't know about you, but I wouldn't ever really buy a console for one game. No one game is a savior for any console, really, and it'll only ruin your experience with a game if you try and think of it as being the savior of a console.

    Will this list of games, among others, playable on a PS3 be its savior? it's possible

    Radikal_Dreamer on
    theincidentsig.jpg
  • Options
    AccualtAccualt Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    People hate the PS3 and Sony. Tune them out if you want or stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist if that helps. But they exist and they have every right to speak out.

    As long as they don't act like asses.
    This thread has been doing a fairly good job of it, despite the former flame baiting thread title.

    I'm going to be keeping a much closer eye on all of these type of conversations. I'll start infracting for less than I usually due if people don't act civily towards one another. I'm tired of PS3 vs 360 as well but interesting things come out of the conversations so they don't need to be squashed completely.
    On the other hand I am beyond sick and tired of people sniping at each other and baiting one another about this vs. that, on both sides of the isle, and then acting all innocent.

    No personal attacks, no flying off the handle, no substanceless posts, no flame baiting. In any threads.
    No more "I hope it comes out on 360" in threads about PS3 games. If you don't have anything at all useful to add to the conversation then don't post.

    Accualt on
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I agree 110 percent Radikal... didnt lime becuase the sheer amount of lime in that post would drain this forum of its lime supply for the week.

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    Did Heavenly Sword alone save the PS3? No
    Did Warhawk alone save the PS3? No
    Did Ratchet and Clank alone save the PS3? No
    Did Uncharted alone save the PS3? No
    Will Haze alone save the PS3? No
    Will Killzone 2 alone save the PS3? No
    Will LittleBigPlanet alone save the PS3? No
    Will Metal Gear Solid 4 alone save the PS3? No
    Will the introduction of Home with Live-like features for absolutely free alone save the PS3? No
    Will the TWO Final Fantasy exclusives alone save the PS3? No
    Will Tekken 6 alone save the PS3? No
    Will Gran Turismo 5 alone save the PS3? No
    Will the fact that the PS3 can play a helluva lot of big name multiplatform games like Grand Theft Auto, etc, alone save the PS3? No

    Will I have a hell of a lot of fun with my PS3? Yes
    Will all these things combined get a few more people to buy a PS3? Yes

    I don't know about you, but I wouldn't ever really buy a console for one game. No one game is a savior for any console, really, and it'll only ruin your experience with a game if you try and think of it as being the savior of a console.

    Will this list of games, among others, playable on a PS3 be its savior? it's possible


    I don't know about saviour but some titles can certainly help. If Sony had locked down GTA4 then that would have made a huge impact on sales of the PS3 come spring next year. Obviously that situation has now changed and will likely only influence fence sitters contemplating getting a PS3.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Lolsony is relative.

    Just because Sony improves their situation doesnt mean they improve relative to the competition.

    Nintendo and Microsoft are pulling farther away from Sony.

    Doesnt justify lolsony but it is certainly fair game to criticise them still, because they are still behind by an ever increasing margin, in both PR, sales and games.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    Radikal_DreamerRadikal_Dreamer Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    What big releases are 360 exclusive in the next few years anyway? The only things I can think of is any sort of Halo spinoff, Mass Effect 2, and Lost Odyssey. Most of the big titles not mentioned in my PS3 exclusive list coming up are going 360 and PS3 (Resident Evil 4, Fallout, Devil May Cry 4, Grand Theft Auto 4, Unreal Tournament 3, etc). For reasons stated by most people on why MGS4 should go multi, I think we're going to see a lot of PS3/360 multi-platform releases this generation, and so it'll come down to whose first party games you like better. As much as Halo's probably pretty fun, Microsoft really doesn't have much else in the way of first party stuff to sway me (though Lost Odyssey looks good). Sony has some good first party stuff, though.

    Radikal_Dreamer on
    theincidentsig.jpg
  • Options
    cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Actually we don't know much about what most developers have in 2008, since most publishers at E3 focused on 2007 rather than trying to build hype for games coming out in the distant future. There's probably all kinds of great games for all three systems that we don't know about yet. The main reason we know about so many games (relatively) coming out in 2008 is because so much got delayed till then.

    I promise that's not a zing.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    The big problem is this.

    MGS4 going multiplatform is considered a 'defeat' for Sony and a 'victory' for Microsoft.

    Objectionably it is a win for both really, but because Sony is in a spot of trouble they need exclusives, while Microsofts 360 thrives on third party games.


    If Halo 3 appeared on Ps3 it would be the exact same situation.

    The point is that when a game has appeared on both in the past the most common outcome is twofold:

    It sells twice as much on 360

    The game is generally perceived to be superior on the 360.


    Whether or not both or either of these come true for any game, it is a precedent set with Madden, Creed and a few other big third party games (Orange Box)

    The problem for a company is that Sony needs them to stay exclusive to drive console sales, but the company needs to go multi platform to recoup losses, hence MGS4s 1 million day one 'requirement'.

    Its some kind of vicious cycle that I dont see how Sony can get out of other than by throwing money at people.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    The big problem is this.

    MGS4 going multiplatform is considered a 'defeat' for Sony and a 'victory' for Microsoft.

    Objectionably it is a win for both really, but because Sony is in a spot of trouble they need exclusives, while Microsofts 360 thrives on third party games.


    If Halo 3 appeared on Ps3 it would be the exact same situation.

    The point is that when a game has appeared on both in the past the most common outcome is twofold:

    It sells twice as much on 360

    The game is generally perceived to be superior on the 360.


    Whether or not both or either of these come true for any game, it is a precedent set with Madden, Creed and a few other big third party games (Orange Box)

    The problem for a company is that Sony needs them to stay exclusive to drive console sales, but the company needs to go multi platform to recoup losses, hence MGS4s 1 million day one 'requirement'.

    Its some kind of vicious cycle that I dont see how Sony can get out of other than by throwing money at people.


    Wasn't it decided that the 1 million on day one requirement was bunk created by someone who eats bunk?

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Microsoft has also been throwing money at people to get an edge over Sony... didnt it throw 40 million dollars at rockstar to have them make 360 exclusive DLC for GTA 4?

    MistaCreepy on
    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
Sign In or Register to comment.