News

Comment by: viny1313 (Apr 25, 2008 15:07)

Oh well, I do, I don't care about your oppinions :P

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 25, 2008 15:22)

Originally posted by viny1313:

---

Oh well, I do, I don't care about your oppinions :P

---

*farts* care yet? :P

It can get more stinker.....

:P

Comment by: wetsparks (Apr 25, 2008 20:19)

the ps3 has plenty of games, just not the big franchises yet. agree, wish the wii had more gamer focused games and less party/casual focused games. 360, hardware fixed and more non shooters would be nice.

Comment by: muccione (Apr 26, 2008 00:55)

Originally posted by viny1313:

---

Oh well, I do, I don't care about your opinions :P

---

I agree...This is a non gamer trying to start $hit with no first-hand knowledge...He does not own any gaming system from the last 20 years...still playing SEGA GENESIS and added the 32x and calls that next gen....Find your own opinion first hand instead of regurgitating things you read...

This is not a attack...its from reading all his combative comments for the last year +..........

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 26, 2008 01:33)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by viny1313:

---

Oh well, I do, I don't care about your opinions :P

---

I agree...This is a non gamer trying to start $hit with no first-hand knowledge...He does not own any gaming system from the last 20 years...still playing SEGA GENESIS and added the 32x and calls that next gen....Find your own opinion first hand instead of regurgitating things you read...

This is not a attack...its from reading all his combative comments for the last year +..........

---

Oh really? seem to mis the posts where I talk about the ins and outs of the systems, lets try itagain shall we the PS3 lacks games this is true I have had it for a year and the handful of mediocre titles were so so at best not worth the 400$ price tag, so I got rid of it so I could focus on my PC,I have had a 360 as well the hardware issues and locked data and mostly on PC titles is a big turn off,I have a PC thus I do not need MSs bondage machine, the WII is like the PS3 only it has even less games I want to play the over all casual focus and 300$ price tag leave me cold when they hit 199 I'll buy in.

Regardless the PS3 still has issues with devs,games and optimizations which is lessening but still prevalent, to say its not a issue is to be foolishly fanboyish, the 360 also has problems with game variety, add on the hardware and data issues its something to consider when making a purchase.

But then again most sheeple say buy it up don't bother protecting your money from poorly designed games or anticonsmer mentailtes.

I rail agisnt modern gaming becuse we are getting less product for more money,look at Halo 3 for Christ sake, not to mention the crappy crapfest titles like Jericho or choking on its own mediocrity titles like Turok.

This is not exclusive to shooters but I will try to describe the change in the early 00s in gaming at one time they made games mostly for gamers with a focus on making a game lil by lil they shifted to a casual focus making games and playable content smaller and smaller, also with the casual mentalities comes the rush rush make a quick buck mentality.

For instance DOOM had good sized maze like levels with plenty of monsters to kill DOOM3 was devoured by "cinemagic" and you were made to run through a 1 way maze of corridors with monsters you could count on your hands(talking about going full circle oy...) Dues ex 2 is another example from large well built levels and story to a rush job on DX2.

The rush factor is quite scary now adays look at bioshock I can pick apart its flaws but look at the PC port with broken mouse and locked keys or Turok PC with multiplayer riped right from the 360 version,sluggish load times and other "duurrr I'm a port" issues, rushing projects, in order to fully devs games in this multi console world they need at least a extra 15 months to finish it.


You might say its a hobby get over it,bah bah bah bah and other wioolie things I say at 40$+ and no right of return the consumer needs to know the trap set for them, I am wiling to admit I shaved the wool got out the black paint and put on the tinfoil hat, so whats your excuse for being as stupid as me MR sheep?

Comment by: DXR88 (Apr 26, 2008 03:25)

Haha... feel better zippy...what you say is the cold hard fact for most who actualy put at least 40 to 80 hours in a game.

its not the consoles Falt at all, its the Developers who forgoten there love for games. its not all the devs fault ether, many good Game developer Groups were bought out, by these quick buck company's
RARE, Bungie, SquareSoft, Enix, And many other's were bought out.

And for those that would say squareenix and squaresoft are the same. you would be sadly mistaken. there names are joint but there games have gotten repetetive Prequals after Prequals, and a multitude of mear re-releases. now we get to FF13.

but for the most part zippy your right. every once in a while they make a game worth buying, Mass Effect was nicely done ive got lots of Mass Effect books i used to read. Oblivion was a nice game as well over 200 hours and i still havent got everything.
an not to forget Lost Oddesy, more japenese humor than i like but it was fun.

But who said finding a Gem in room full of artificial gem's was easy right.

Comment by: viny1313 (Apr 26, 2008 03:26)

I agree with pretty much all of your post, but I still think those games are worth buying a PS3 ;)

GT = :D

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 26, 2008 04:11)

Originally posted by DXR88:

---

Haha... feel better zippy...what you say is the cold hard fact for most who actualy put at least 40 to 80 hours in a game.

its not the consoles Falt at all, its the Developers who forgoten there love for games. its not all the devs fault ether, many good Game developer Groups were bought out, by these quick buck company's
RARE, Bungie, SquareSoft, Enix, And many other's were bought out.

And for those that would say squareenix and squaresoft are the same. you would be sadly mistaken. there names are joint but there games have gotten repetetive Prequals after Prequals, and a multitude of mear re-releases. now we get to FF13.

but for the most part zippy your right. every once in a while they make a game worth buying, Mass Effect was nicely done ive got lots of Mass Effect books i used to read. Oblivion was a nice game as well over 200 hours and i still havent got everything.
an not to forget Lost Oddesy, more japenese humor than i like but it was fun.

But who said finding a Gem in room full of artificial gem's was easy right.

---

Oh please its the mentality of the industry most just adpeted to casaul gaming and went on with their lives thee blatant sell outs like anything EA buys and most of edios titles, rare just has not been able to make a lot of games of late because they have not been giving the go on projects what games they have made feel like force fed cash ins I do not feel they have sold out as much are stuck in a rut, the same could said for bungie in some respects altho with MS backing them the only reason Halo sucks now is due to the mind set of the industry, but with Square/Enix both were wishy washy from the start they had a few hits and a few misses, Square bought out Enix and was always in control of things so they were not bought out as much as went 100% casual focus damning the FF brand into casual piss tainted watery hell it started with FF8 not FFX if out are reading into my later joke to much.

Its really the whole change of focus from gaming to corporate mindsets, the prevailing "who cares if we make a good product we just want to sell lots of it" being the leading factor in the loss of "gaming in gaming" that and casuals care not for quality and polish so why should we waste profit time in doing it..

Lost Oddessy + mass effect almost made me buy a 360 again but mass effect is coming to the PC and it should not be a cluster fck of a port like Bioshock and turok.

Oblivion is a casual cluster fck its just watered down and made all sour and sticky for the casuals I can not stand it and I fear Fo3 is being bum raped for the mindless masses as well.

In the end the game industry has went casual leaving only a few gems left to mine and at higher and higher prices (face it 40-50$ today is 100$ 10 years ago) there is lil reason in my mind not to question the price V cost of the whole rotten thing.

its like comic book(most IP/CP really) and game movies if you enjoy the fiction being raped for casuals then enjoy wallowing in the poo of the game industry if you can believe it to be dirt then by all means be a happy lil pigy, ignorance will give a peaceful stress free life so they say.

The Price of wisdom is the loss of innocences, the price of knowledge is the loss of freedom.:Quote from COTOP:ambiguous character quote

Comment by: wetsparks (Apr 26, 2008 05:44)

Yes, Zippy, we know you hate modern games and live in the nostalgia of old time gaming. But it isn't like those old time games where that much longer than games now. Think about it, how long was Zelda: A Link to the Past? 10 hours, tops? So length hasn't changed hardly at all in the last 15 years. But with much, much better graphics they have to make the games "more casual" to sell more copies to make money. They are a business, they HAVE to make money. If you want a charity to make a game, you get crap like Second Life (that was made by some college students as a project wasn't it?). Like I told you before, if you don't want to pay the price for the games, rent them. Set a weekend aside and you can beat 90% of the games in a weekend of good gaming and save yourself a lot of money. BTW, the shot you took at Square Enix, it isn't like their early games where the huge games they are now. FF1&2 were 20 hours if you didn't know what the hell you where doing and wasted as much time as possible. The SNES games weren't that much longer either. So they definitely did not go casual, they went more hardcore by making longer games.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 26, 2008 07:06)

Originally posted by wetsparks:

---

Yes, Zippy, we know you hate modern games and live in the nostalgia of old time gaming. But it isn't like those old time games where that much longer than games now. Think about it, how long was Zelda: A Link to the Past? 10 hours, tops? So length hasn't changed hardly at all in the last 15 years. But with much, much better graphics they have to make the games "more casual" to sell more copies to make money. They are a business, they HAVE to make money. If you want a charity to make a game, you get crap like Second Life (that was made by some college students as a project wasn't it?). Like I told you before, if you don't want to pay the price for the games, rent them. Set a weekend aside and you can beat 90% of the games in a weekend of good gaming and save yourself a lot of money. BTW, the shot you took at Square Enix, it isn't like their early games where the huge games they are now. FF1&2 were 20 hours if you didn't know what the hell you where doing and wasted as much time as possible. The SNES games weren't that much longer either. So they definitely did not go casual, they went more hardcore by making longer games.

---

Oh yes new games are prefect and have not been raped my cash in casual mentalities.....

Sorry much like hollywood I don't buy it, good media is good media period the zombies will buy it regardless if its good or not, and they will sale more of it if its good.

And if its not good I will rail agisnt it.


Take another look games compare quake 2 to qauke 4, Halo 1 to HAlo 2 and 3 and other games you will find gaps in content and design, Zelda OOT had alil less content than LTTP but for practical trems they were even my main compalit on OOT I didn't like the plot of it,setting was ok but the I didnt like the story I liked LA alil more, MM was shorter but had more filler the same for WW, content is changing if you look hard enough, if you can;t see it your content in the casual market,I am not they can do better but they will not because there is no profit for them too.

Comment by: viny1313 (Apr 26, 2008 13:40)

Ohh I'll play Halo CE over Halo 3 any day...

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 26, 2008 14:11)

Originally posted by viny1313:

---

Ohh I'll play Halo CE over Halo 3 any day...

---

I like Halo 1 PC myslef..the other Halos tho...kinda fail....

Comment by: viny1313 (Apr 26, 2008 16:26)

Halo 2 wasn't bad with the mods... Some of the online maps were nice but Halo 3 was just crap. All for the money. What a horrible way to end a series...

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 26, 2008 16:46)

Originally posted by viny1313:

---

Halo 2 wasn't bad with the mods... Some of the online maps were nice but Halo 3 was just crap. All for the money. What a horrible way to end a series...

---

I have Halo 2 PC running on XP,and I did finish the Xbox version but tis just not as great as Halo was.

Comment by: wetsparks (Apr 27, 2008 04:10)

I thought Halo was crap personally, a failed attempt to make Starcraft into a shooter. And I never said new games were perfect, you just think that old games were so great but they were the same as these games are now, except in 2d instead of 3d.

Comment by: DXR88 (Apr 27, 2008 20:19)

(wetsparks) i'll have to disagree with you on that. there were more good games realeased then than there are now.. its a given that there will always be bad games but think for a second.. alright out of my head there were good games realesed every 3 months then Now we Wait 3-4 years for another Good game to be released. with all intent i dont mind the wait, but the wait is to long and its only going to get longer with each new system as the programming gets more and more complicated. the people that churn out this hardware are afraid that somebody might hack there hardware. Sow even new SDK that go to Developers are being locked to what you can and cannot Due.
this kills 3rd party support and give the 3rd parties 2 options ether go out of bussiness or join EA or other Crappy Company that only cares about the buck.

Comment by: wetsparks (Apr 28, 2008 02:51)

There are plenty of good games coming out and you don't have to wait 3-4 years, unless you are talking about one company and in that case they are being lazy. Insomniac is able to put out a PS3 game every year, and the PS3 is supposed to be the hardest to program for. Remember also that video games used to be so bad before Nintendo that video games virtually died. And even Nintendo allows crap like movie tie ins and barbie and my little pony on their system.

Comment by: FredBun (Apr 30, 2008 23:35)

This is probably off topic, but I need to find this out before I let my wife go out and spend big bucks, my son has a ton of playstaion 2 games, my wife wants to get a a playstation 3, is it true that you can not play ps2 games on a ps3, I've heard some people say yes and some say no, I put my trust in what members at AD say.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (Apr 30, 2008 23:44)

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

This is probably off topic, but I need to find this out before I let my wife go out and spend big bucks, my son has a ton of playstaion 2 games, my wife wants to get a a playstation 3, is it true that you can not play ps2 games on a ps3, I've heard some people say yes and some say no, I put my trust in what members at AD say.

---

you should PM an addict,for they will know...if not they will know pooo....


The US 60GB and 20GB units have 80%+ BWC for PS2 titles, the 40 and 80GB units have a 40-70% compatibility ratio, if you got the money go for a 60GB IMO it will best serve you, if not a 80GB unit is fine just have a PS2 handy because it can not play some games.

Comment by: FredBun (May 01, 2008 00:09)

Thanks for thre comeback zip, this whole thing still freaks me out, I myself am not into any games, I have a handicapped son who loves to play them and does great with them, we don't mind spending the extra bucks to give him a litle extra happines, but holy crapola, these people are really ripping us off, we go out and buy a ton of ps2 game, you would thing these moguls would give us a little break and let us also play our 2 on the 3 consoles, man what a rip.

Now I hear that if we get a 60 or an 80 that might do it, I also heard a guy at a blockbuster store say something simular, he said sony was selling an 80, but not anymore for now anyway, he said the 80 could play the 2, but he also said he was pretty sure it did, so you see you really can't get a difinate answer, regardles, this whole thing leaves a really bad taste in my mouth, we are really getting it up the old gege whole.

Comment by: DXR88 (May 01, 2008 00:54)

Fred, i know it might be hard, but you should continue To use the PS2 for PS1, PS2. The Playstation 3 is a power house if you will and Backwards comatiability is an issue For most. if you can find one the 20 gig units are nearly completly Backwards compatiable i think around 98%. stay away from the 80 gigs they have software that runs PS2 games about 60-70% BC. 40 gig dont touch as they have no BC.

right know. i would recommend ether a 20 or a 60 gig unit they have the highist BC.

as i said before keeping your PS2 is the bestway to play the PS2 games.

Comment by: wetsparks (May 01, 2008 04:41)

did a quick google search and I found this

Comment by: FredBun (May 01, 2008 05:08)

Thanks to all, I have just learned more about what choice I should make in this one little thread than I have tried to learn about this issue for the past two months, leave it the people of AD to set the records straight, again, thank you everybody.

Comment by: ZippyDSM (May 01, 2008 08:34)

Originally posted by wetsparks:

---

did a quick google search and I found this

---

the 40GB unit can play PSX games, the 80GB unit has trouble with 30-40% of PS2 titles.

Comment by: Gnawnivek (May 01, 2008 13:29)

The 60gb is the best IMO, you can always upgrade the hdd size afterward of course... I believe all models allow you to play PS1 games via the PSP (remote play), but certain games don't work well due to lagging issues.