Playstation Discussion Archive

[dabookerman]

I want a HD/Blueray player. But It looks like HD is the way to go. 599 is a lot of money but I acctualy think the PS3 will be worth it (after some years). It's withoutadoubt a powerfull machine with a lot of posibilties and emm... things.

 

Believe me, the day Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is released, that will be ALL the reason you need to buy a PS3

[BlueStar]

Believe me, the day Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is released, that will be ALL the reason you need to buy a PS3

 

Imagining how many hours of pointless cut scenes they'll be able to fit on a blueray disc, it doesn't really bear thinking about...

[dabookerman]

Imagining how many hours of pointless cut scenes they'll be able to fit on a blueray disc, it doesn't really bear thinking about...

 

Pointless cutscenes to the ignorant fool

[BlueStar]

Fascinating cut-scenes to the wannabe sixth-form poet who think's they're deep and meaningful rather than pretentious filler

[dabookerman]

Fascinating cut-scenes to the wannabe sixth-form poet who think's they're deep and meaningful rather than pretentious filler

No, Why dont we take out cutscenes out of every game, oh how fantastic.

[BlueStar]

Yep, the only two options are hours and hours and hours worth of pointless cutscenes, or no cut scenes in games at all, ever.

[dabookerman]

Yep, the only two options are hours and hours and hours worth of pointless cutscenes, or no cut scenes in games at all, ever.

 

I hope you realise, that you can actually skip the cutscenes, by pressing the 'Start' button located on the PS2 control pad.

[BlueStar]

I hope you realise, that you can actually skip the cutscenes, by pressing the 'Start' button located on the PS2 control pad.

 

Yup, and skip the parts they concentrated half their budget and development time on. Hopefully then you'll be able to get a 50% rebate on the game and the 500 quid toy you bought to play it on.

[pedrocasilva]

Pointless cutscenes to the ignorant fool

I'm a ignorant fool that prefers to be 599 dollars richer, then.

 

Pointless? I have a point though (what can I do with $599...)

 

I'd never give full price for a game like Metal Gear Solid, let alone buying a console along with it for $599+game... Also I just know that 6 months later or so they'll announce "Metal Gear Solid 4 Sub-something" to milk the cow further, making the early adopters screwed once more, because their version is just... outdated... Subsistence and Substance versions are just a example of that.

 

About Blu-ray... blu-ray might fail miserably and then you're left paying hundreds of bucks for a useless piece of machinery. Also you don't need all that capacity for games, specially considering how the development prices are going now... HD-DVD is more than enough and a lot cheaper to produce, and free of sony-financing fees.

 

Considering you will be using H.264 instead of doing like Sony and insisting on using MPEG2 so they are able to fill the discs. Lastly the graphics are supposed to be so good that you won't need to use video/FMV, and I just can't think of any Psone game that filled a CD without using FMV's, it's one of the main reasons to need space right next to the textures and sound. Taking that into account... 8,5 GB DVD is not enough for a HD console.

[KKOB]

Believe me, the day Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is released, that will be ALL the reason you need to buy a PS3

 

although MGS4 does look good, i've never really got on with the MGS series, i have MGS:TTS and MGS2 and i will get MGS3 when the subsistance (is that right?) version comes out this year. i do love the storylines of these games, i just find the gameplay a little . . . meh-same with Resident Evil (except for 4).

 

however is it just me or does MGS4 seem like a much mroe action orientated game rather than the stealth bitch its been up until now?

[knightendo]

£500 or thereabouts is far too much for a console no matter what game it is you're after!!

 

and bluestar is right, the ps2's dvd drive is the equivalent to those hhhuuuggggeee dvd players that came out for huge sums of money at the beginning. nowadays, you can buy a model in tesco for thirty quid which is much better quality! heck, it only took a year for them to come down to regular prices of £100-£200! when i new format comes out like this sony knows very few regular people actually buy into it 'cause the machines are still being experimented with and they look huge and fugly. all they are doing is dressing it up inside an overly complex console with a brand name that they hope will force blu-ray down the throats of the unsuspecting public.

 

and all those people who have bought dvd recorders or dvd players with hard drives are NOT gonna buy into a new read-only format again!

 

you think they woulda learnt their lessons with betamax, that other rival cd format, minidisc and umd! but nope, sony is determined to have it's own format no matter what. so throwing it into a new playstation is probably what seems like a "sure thing" to them, but hey it didn't work for umd, i doubt it will again.

 

and why do sony's formats never take off...? even though something like betamax was actually technically superior to vhs, sony's equipment they place these formats into are notoriously unreliable and have shody workmanship, and i can see the same thing in the ps3: just for one example, look at all the problems they're having with cells but they don't care! they're gonna throw out ps3's and some will have one processor down already!

 

here mr kutaragi, have this pistol and take aim at your foot...

[dabookerman]

Yup, and skip the parts they concentrated half their budget and development time on. Hopefully then you'll be able to get a 50% rebate on the game and the 500 quid toy you bought to play it on.

 

At the end of the day, Kojima provides what the fans want. If you keep complaining about the cutscenes then stop playing the fucking game.

 

I'm a ignorant fool that prefers to be 599 dollars richer, then.

 

Pointless? I have a point though (what can I do with $599...)

 

I'd never give full price for a game like Metal Gear Solid, let alone buying a console along with it for $599+game... Also I just know that 6 months later or so they'll announce "Metal Gear Solid 4 Sub-something" to milk the cow further, making the early adopters screwed once more, because their version is just... outdated... Subsistence and Substance versions are just a example of that.

 

About Blu-

ray... blu-ray might fail miserably and then you're left paying hundreds of bucks for a useless piece of machinery. Also you don't need all that capacity for games, specially considering how the development prices are going now... HD-DVD is more than enough and a lot cheaper to produce, and free of sony-financing fees.

 

Considering you will be using H.264 instead of doing like Sony and insisting on using MPEG2 so they are able to fill the discs. Lastly the graphics are supposed to be so good that you won't need to use video/FMV, and I just can't think of any Psone game that filled a CD without using FMV's, it's one of the main reasons to need space right next to the textures and sound. Taking that into account... 8,5 GB DVD is not enough for a HD console.

 

Lets talk about milking shall we, Mario party 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

2 Versions of Zelda that are 99% exactly the same.

Also, if you tell me that you wouldnt get a console JUST for Zelda, then you are bullshitting me.

Subsistence and substance are big enough improvements and they have been updated to a certain degree that they can release a new game.

Substance was made multiplatform. Subsistence has online, has 2 extra games with it, has a whole new camera system.

 

although MGS4 does look good, i've never really got on with the MGS series, i have MGS:TTS and MGS2 and i will get MGS3 when the subsistance (is that right?) version comes out this year. i do love the storylines of these games, i just find the gameplay a little . . . meh-same with Resident Evil (except for 4).

 

however is it just me or does MGS4 seem like a much mroe action orientated game rather than the stealth bitch its been up until now?

 

Hideo Kojima has promised that there will be a lot of stealth in this game.

[BlueStar]

At the end of the day, Kojima provides what the fans want. If you keep complaining about the cutscenes then stop playing the fucking game.

 

Yep, Britney Spears gives the fans what they want and if you don't like her, you don't buy her music - does that mean if someone tells you it's worth splashing out on some shiny new bit of kit just to play her latest album, you can't disagree with them?

[KKOB]

Hideo Kojima has promised that there will be a lot of stealth in this game.

 

DAMN!!!

 

ah well, i might play some MGS:TTS later and see how i like it. i just hate stealth, i mean splinter cell is what i view as the best stealth game but i cant stand it, its far to anal and boring. give me a fun and gun shooter or Gears of War anyday and i'll love you.

[dabookerman]

Yep, Britney Spears gives the fans what they want and if you don't like her, you don't buy her music - does that mean if someone tells you it's worth splashing out on some shiny new bit of kit just to play her latest album, you can't disagree with them?

 

Oh well, the ps3 wont cost £2 billion when mgs4 comes out, there will be a price cut.

 

And i can afford it, so i honestly dont really care how much it costs to play one of the best games of next generation

 

I mean i spent £120 on a Metal gear solid figurine

 

So at the end of the day, from MY perspective, MGS4 IS the only reason why people should buy a ps3.

 

DAMN!!!

 

ah well, i might play some MGS:TTS later and see how i like it. i just hate stealth, i mean splinter cell is what i view as the best stealth game but i cant stand it, its far to anal and boring. give me a fun and gun shooter or Gears of War anyday and i'll love you.

 

MGS was never 100% stealth, it has arguably some of the most original boss fights in games. There are action sequences. The game is presented as a movie, you only have to play the bike chase part towards the end of MGS3 to see what i mean.

[BlueStar]

I could afford it as well, I could snap up ten of em at launch if I was so inclined - but I simply couldn't justify spending that much on a toy, especially one without any games which make me think "I want one!"

[KKOB]

MGS was never 100% stealth, it has arguably some of the most original boss fights in games. There are action sequences. The game is presented as a movie, you only have to play the bike chase part towards the end of MGS3 to see what i mean.

 

i know what you mean-i've saw my friend play through most of MGS on the PSone, thats why i got MGS2 when i got my PS2 (8 quid for it! lol) and then i couldnt get into it, so i decided to wait to play MGS:TTS cos i heard its alot shorter than MGS2. so i finally got that about 3 months ago and all i've saw are the pregame briefings int he extras bit cos i've ran out of memory space BUT i have just bought JonSt's MC 1019 so i should be able to sit down with it very soon

 

hope its good now hehe

 

So at the end of the day, from MY perspective, MGS4 IS the only reason why people should buy a ps3.

 

*cough* FF XIII *cough*

[dabookerman]

I could afford it as well, I could snap up ten of em at launch if I was so inclined - but I simply couldn't justify spending that much on a toy, especially one without any games which make me think "I want one!"

 

Well thats the reason you wont see me getting near the PS3, I mean ill be honest, if MGS wasnt on the ps3, i wouldnt give a shit about the machine.

 

i know what you mean-i've saw my friend play through most of MGS on the PSone, thats why i got MGS2 when i got my PS2 (8 quid for it! lol) and then i couldnt get into it, so i decided to wait to play MGS:TTS cos i heard its alot shorter than MGS2. so i finally got that about 3 months ago and all i've saw are the pregame briefings int he extras bit cos i've ran out of memory space BUT i have just bought JonSt's MC 1019 so i should be able to sit down with it very soon

 

hope its good now hehe

 

 

 

*cough* FF XIII *cough*

 

MGS TTS is incredibly short, if you play through the game, sit through the cutscenes and the codec sequences, you would probably reach between 15-20 hours

 

the second time u play it, you would be inclined to skip the codec and cutscenes, you would know what you're doing, you could probably finish it in around 5 hours.

 

I cant really blame SK tho, i mean the mgs2 mechanics did make the game a lot easier.

[pedrocasilva]

At the end of the day, Kojima provides what the fans want. If you keep complaining about the cutscenes then stop playing the fucking game.

 

Lets talk about milking shall we, Mario party 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

2 Versions of Zelda that are 99% exactly the same.

Also, if you tell me that you wouldnt get a console JUST for Zelda, then you are bullshitting me.

Subsistence and substance are big enough improvements and they have been updated to a certain degree that they can release a new game.

Substance was made multiplatform. Subsistence has online, has 2 extra games with it, has a whole new camera system.

 

Hideo Kojima has promised that there will be a lot of stealth in this game.

I never bought Mario party :P and I've yet to see a Mario Party Subsistence on stores.

 

About buying two zelda versions... I guess you're right, I could do that with the $599 I spared and buy a wii, and still have money left

 

I would get a console for Zelda... but Zelda is a big game that will last a long while... 70 hours (or more) game. Metal Gear is short and IMO focuses on cutscenes and presentation rather than gameplay, so... No, I wouldn't buy a console for it, and I wouldn't pay full price for it.

 

Seriously though I made the above post (and this one) half-teasing you (it's fun) but I can understand your point and respect it, MGS is a great quality franchise in my book, but... for me is like I stated above, I wouldn't buy a console for it, nor pay full price, thus it's not worth it, for me.

 

Subsistence and Substance are improvements over a released version... because this way they can sell the same game twice to collectors...

Seriously I'd be pissed if I paid full price for the original.

[mario_jr]

Just wait till they port MGS 4 to the 360. Hey it might happen seeing as how they might have to downgrade the game due to the PS3 hardwear.

[KKOB]

Just wait till they port MGS 4 to the 360. Hey it might happen seeing as how they might have to downgrade the game due to the PS3 hardwear.

 

lmao!!!

 

hey it happened with MGS2

[dabookerman]

Wow, there is so many wrongs things here

 

I never bought Mario party :P and I've yet to see a Mario Party Subsistence on stores.

 

Thats just a silly remark

 

About buying two zelda versions... I guess you're right, I could do that with the $599 I spared and buy a wii, and still have money left

 

Like i said, again, the ps3 wont cost that much when MGS4 comes out.

 

I would get a console for Zelda... but Zelda is a big game that will last a long while... 70 hours (or more) game. Metal Gear is short and IMO focuses on cutscenes and presentation rather than gameplay, so... No, I wouldn't buy a console for it, and I wouldn't pay full price for it.

 

The gameplay has always been consistent, and with each sequel there has been a lot of gameplay additions to keep the series fresh and original, and worthy of the title: "sequel". I challenge anyone to say otherwise. The game isnt about cutscenes and presentation, the game is always well presented, because Kojima and his team like to put effort into presenting the game well. The cutscenes are there to progress the story, as the story is quite complicated. MGS is a series, where the gameplay, graphics, sound and presentation are top class.

 

Seriously though I made the above post (and this one) half-teasing you (it's fun) but I can understand your point and respect it, MGS is a great quality franchise in my book, but... for me is like I stated above, I wouldn't buy a console for it, nor pay full price, thus it's not worth it, for me.

 

I dont expect any non MGS fan to buy a ps3 for it. I mean i will state this, i have a strong dislike of sony, this is why i own mgs 1 - 3 and not even have the console to play it on.

 

Subsistence and Substance are improvements over a released version... because this way they can sell the same game twice to collectors...

Seriously I'd be pissed if I paid full price for the original.

 

You say that without even knowing anything about the games. Have you played them?

 

Just wait till they port MGS 4 to the 360. Hey it might happen seeing as how they might have to downgrade the game due to the PS3 hardwear.

 

It would be downgraded, i know many people who say MGS2 plays terrible on the XBox. since the consoles arent the same, it would take a complete rebuild to have the game running as well as on another console. This is why MGS4 remains a ps3 exclusive.

[pedrocasilva]

Like i said, again, the ps3 wont cost that much when MGS4 comes out.

neither will Wii and Zelda TP. You could even wait for PSthree (slim edition) to buy one... but knowing how Sony cuts corners on manufacturing quality... cheaper might not be "best".

The gameplay has always been consistent, and with each sequel there has been a lot of gameplay additions to keep the series fresh and original, and worthy of the title: "sequel". I challenge anyone to say otherwise. The game isnt about cutscenes and presentation, the game is always well presented, because Kojima and his team like to put effort into presenting the game well. The cutscenes are there to progress the story, as the story is quite complicated. MGS is a series, where the gameplay, graphics, sound and presentation are top class.

Gameplay adictions, like diferent stages out of the sneaking action realm? Every game in stores today should be like that, no matter what genre it's in, MGS would just have stopped in time if otherwise. 10 hours of the same gaming experience are dull for todays standard.

 

Cutscenes and presentation make (or break) a MGS, simple as that. about considering them a filler... well, you could consider playable parts a filler in MGS, it's just the type of game it is, a interactive movie, short (for a game), and if you take the interactive part you have just that, a CG movie.

I dont expect any non MGS fan to buy a ps3 for it. I mean i will state this, i have a strong dislike of sony, this is why i own mgs 1 - 3 and not even have the console to play it on.

I don't question that, like I stated it's your opinion, and I can understand that.

 

You say that without even knowing anything about the games. Have you played them?

Yes, I did (play them). the story is the same right? then it's the same game; it's not a remake. it's just a reharshed version with extras done after the original release, so the sales won't drop after x months and they get more profits, but IMO they screw early adopters, and in future versions might even damage sales of the product on launch since people other than fans may wait.

 

there's hoping that those "extras" come as free downloads for early adopters on PS3.

 

If I bought sons of liberty or snake eater I'd be pissed by the "reharsh versions" sure, they bring more content, but then Konami should just have released it on game's launch, or make a more expensive collectors edition...

 

It's silly if you're not a MGS fan to buy a game at full price that you just know will have a better version later on. Personally I wouldn't even give full price for the better version.

It would be downgraded, i know many people who say MGS2 plays terrible on the XBox. since the consoles arent the same, it would take a complete rebuild to have the game running as well as on another console. This is why MGS4 remains a ps3 exclusive.

I can explain that... PS2 doesn't have a real GPU, the CPU puts out all the fillrate, while Xbox is like a PC, with a relatively weak CPU (for fill rate) and a good GPU... anyway, all those particle effects were being done on the CPU, then they ported the code they leaved as is, and that means scenes with a lot of particles effects like snow... will run slow as hell.

 

This can also be noticed on GC's Twin Snake's in snowy areas (GC has more fill rate on CPU than Xbox)

 

Anyway... this is just bad engine porting, Konami could do better than that.

 

When asked whether MGS4 could work on 360 during a recent 1up interview, he said: "Yes, that's technically possible."

 

(...)

 

So yes. Metal Gear Solid 4 could work on Xbox 360 ("maybe some nuance or a small detail here and there might be different") and the reason for that, apparently is that "there are really no differences" between the PS3, 360 and PC

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=62199

 

I don't think it'll happen and the game wasn't in the dev stage's it's now but... we never know. there was a game from konami on Xbox that came with MGS4 references (pub posters and all)

[Hero-of-Time]

Nice arguments going on in here time for me to enter the fray.

 

I love the MGS series ( probably not as much as booker ) but I have to admit that the series is probably best known for its cutscenes rather than its gameplay.

 

Dont get me wrong, when MGS came out it was both the story and the stelth based gameplay that got it noticed but as the other sequels came out it became apparent that it was all about the storyline. You came prove this by how fast you can complete all the MGS games by skipping the cutscenes, the games last like 3-5 hours tops.

 

Dabooker is right though in saying that MGS series has always been about presentation. The music, sounds and storyline all play an important part of the game. I dont class MGS series as a game, more of an experience and I love each and every cutscene that are in all of the games.

 

In regards to Zelda being released in 2 different versions I have to applaud Nintendo for doing it. It is being supportive of its fans who have a Gamecube and dont want to upgrade to the Wii yet and at the same time its catering for those who want to play the game on the Wii with a few extra features.

[knightendo]

i don't think releasing two versions of the new zelda game falls into the same category, as they're for two different consoles. anyone who doesn't want to buy a Wii yet can get the GC one, people who get Wii get it's version instead.

 

i can understand why you'd want to buy a console for one game, but Wii is a helluva lot cheaper, so i can understand someone buying it just for zelda at the beginning. but i can't see the ps3 price coming down much next year, they're already losing money on it, and have been told by Sony giwigs (according to Edge and GAmesTM too i think) that the playstation department HAS to make a profit this generation. for your sake tho, i really hope it does, or that you can find a preowned one next year when your game comes out (i'll keep an eye out in my GAME store i work in for ya ).