Friday, November 2, 2007

24 new messages in 8 topics - digest

alt.games.video.xbox
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox?hl=en

alt.games.video.xbox@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Assassin's Creed Famitsu review: 37/40 - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/97b66bfcf6c9934e?hl=en
* 5yr Old Son saved over our copy of Lego Star Wars ll? Help - 2 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/673ff3957dd2974a?hl=en
* New $99, 'compact' PS2 to arrive in 2008 - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/585c5a1123fe3172?hl=en
* Xbox's Embarrasing History - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/905c5e8c40f5ed78?hl=en
* On the Concept of "Replayability" was Re: Ratchet and Clank back up over 90%
- 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/c81f8b53e338c9a7?hl=en
* COD4 PS3 Version Will Be Superior to Xbox - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/fcc5db383e9c7966?hl=en
* Capcom resurrects Bionic Commando (multiplatorm) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/bb5d5ca17b26354d?hl=en
* Are There Plans On Releasing The PC content On XBL Of Gears Of War - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/5fc8a89c6661b347?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Assassin's Creed Famitsu review: 37/40
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/97b66bfcf6c9934e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:48 pm
From: "Brenden D. Chase"

"boodybandit" <allaboutgamez@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QLSdnf8CDLnO_rbanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:1194022004.523749.101720@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> On Nov 2, 12:44 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:1194021043.290917.109720@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Nov 2, 11:56 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> >> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>> >>news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> >> > "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> >> >news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>> >> >> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40,
>>> >> >> citing
>>> >> >> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the one
>>> >> >> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>>>
>>> >> > 1 button combat?
>>> >> > OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>>>
>>> >> How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights
>>> >> might as
>>> >> well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>>>
>>> > Not if it's rythmic combat - which Fable 2 is using as well.
>>>
>>> > It's context sensitive, and you can easily fuck up fighting. This is
>>> > not a beat 'em up.
>>>
>>> > PS. Most PC games have one button combat. (laugh)
>>>
>>> Im all about the immersion and 1 button combats removes that for me.-
>>> Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Says who? Have you actually played it? Single button combat may make
>> it MORE immersive - becoming all about technique and less about button
>> hunt-and-mash and combo memorization.
>>
>> But hey, if you lost interest, that's fine - more copies for the rest
>> of us.
>
> You sound like Gamespot in reverse.
> Hey maybe you can make it a a reviewer afterall.
> Either way 1 button combat wont appeal to a lot of people. So don't make
> it out like I'm the minority here. Not that any of this matters because I
> just got off the phone wit ha friend and he said this info isn't correct.
> Ubisoft is giving you the option of one button combat but you don't have
> to play that way. I hope he is right nad this information you posted was
> just lost in translation.

One button combat didnt hurt Space Invaders or Asteroids.


== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:18 pm
From: The alMIGHTY N


On Nov 2, 4:07 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N" <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1194031050.191276.313530@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 2, 2:03 pm, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 2, 2:02 pm, slayerma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >> > On Nov 2, 9:30 am, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > On Nov 2, 11:56 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >> > > >news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> >> > > > > "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> > > > >news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >> > > > >> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40,
> >> > > > >> citing
> >> > > > >> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the
> >> > > > >> one
> >> > > > >> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>
> >> > > > > 1 button combat?
> >> > > > > OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>
> >> > > > How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights
> >> > > > might as
> >> > > > well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>
> >> > > Not if it's rythmic combat - which Fable 2 is using as well.
>
> >> > > It's context sensitive, and you can easily fuck up fighting. This is
> >> > > not a beat 'em up.
>
> >> > > PS. Most PC games have one button combat. (laugh)
>
> >> > I would love to see you name a good action PC game with one button
> >> > combat...- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> Any given FPS.
>
> > Most FPS games actually have 2-button combat... weapons these days
> > always have a secondary firing mode...
>
> Isn't jumping, sucking, running, switching weapons, etc and so on considered
> part of the combat?
> If so I don't know a FPS game on any system that doesn't require several
> buttons. I am a little confused as to why Jonah is defending this game so
> hard. It's not like it's an exclusive.

Doesn't he pretty much defend anything that comes out on the Xbox 360?

I don't want to pass judgment on the game myself yet because it may
turn out the "control each limb individually" setup is actually
cool... it just sounds kind of retarded.

And who knows... maybe the one-button combat works. You never know...

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:19 pm
From: The alMIGHTY N


On Nov 2, 4:19 pm, slayerma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 2, 11:03 am, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 2, 2:02 pm, slayerma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 2, 9:30 am, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 2, 11:56 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> > > > >news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> > > > > > "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > > > > >news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > >> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40, citing
> > > > > >> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the one
> > > > > >> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>
> > > > > > 1 button combat?
> > > > > > OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>
> > > > > How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights might as
> > > > > well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>
> > > > Not if it's rythmic combat - which Fable 2 is using as well.
>
> > > > It's context sensitive, and you can easily fuck up fighting. This is
> > > > not a beat 'em up.
>
> > > > PS. Most PC games have one button combat. (laugh)
>
> > > I would love to see you name a good action PC game with one button
> > > combat...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Any given FPS.
>
> Nice try, I said name one. Any decent FPS has alternate fire modes,
> dodges, and a slew of other things to keep your hands busy. I said
> action game by the way, FPS's can get away with left click to shoot
> combat only, but good ones do not. One button combat in an action game
> would be like one button Guitar Hero.
>
> Imagine one button combat in a Prince of Persia game, which just so
> happens to be the same genre.

Forget same genre - Assassin's Creed was developed by the exact same
team who originally intended this to be the next Prince of Persia but
decided to create a new IP instead.

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:21 pm
From: The alMIGHTY N


On Nov 2, 4:02 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N" <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1194031101.534269.148280@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 2, 12:43 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:ZMHWi.40957$eY.34156@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>
> >> > "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> >> >> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> >>news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >> >>> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40,
> >> >>> citing
> >> >>> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the one
> >> >>> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>
> >> >> 1 button combat?
> >> >> OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>
> >> > How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights might
> >> > as
> >> > well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>
> >> Exactly.
> >> Oh well this is shaping up to be a rental.
> >> Just more money for games I was going to pass on. Maybe GH3 or Pro
> >> Street.
>
> > Guitar Hero III is pretty cool. It's much more fun with 2 people than
> > 1, though.
>
> > I tried the Rock Band demo in Best Buy today. Now *that's* fun. I've
> > always liked the drums and this is the closest I'm going to get to
> > playing drums.
>
> A friend of mine is completely addicted to GH3. He purchased it on a whim
> because his internet has been down for over a month and he wanted some
> single player. He is begging me to give it a try. He claims it's the most
> fun he has had with a console in years. He set it up in his theater and he
> is having a party Sunday and wants to challenge me. I'm thinking about
> running out and getting it tonight just so I don't lose to him.

Did you play Guitar Hero II at all? It's pretty much the same thing
but with different songs and a new coop campaign mode (which just
mixes up the order of the songs).

But "pretty much the same thing" as something that was tons of fun
can't be bad.

They give you a little more leeway on the time in which you can hit a
button but I think that's to set up more of those moves where you
strum once and then change fingers without strumming again.

>From what I've heard, the game on the harder levels is still hard, if
not harder, even with more leniency...

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:24 pm
From: The alMIGHTY N


On Nov 2, 4:21 pm, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > A friend of mine is completely addicted to GH3. He purchased it on a whim
> > because his internet has been down for over a month and he wanted some
> > single player. He is begging me to give it a try. He claims it's the
> > most fun he has had with a console in years. He set it up in his theater
> > and he is having a party Sunday and wants to challenge me. I'm thinking
> > about running out and getting it tonight just so I don't lose to him.
>
> I bought GH3 and it's my first foray into the franchise. It's definitely
> fun, even single player, but I wouldn't say it's the most fun I've had in
> years. Definitely worth the money IMO as it's got long term replay value
> (I'm just about finished with the songs on EASY level, and man trying it
> even on MEDIUM level kicked my ass. I ran through it on expert and I don't
> see how anybody does even the slow-ride with that speed :-)
>
> The Easy level doesn't really feel as "musical", but you can see in the
> hard/Expert levels how you're hitting chords, etc. and it feels much more
> like actually playing the "real" guitar. My issue is it seems to play those
> harder levels I'll have to practice just like I do with my real guitar (and
> if I'm going to practice playing metallica I might as well practice to play
> the real thing :-)

True, but not everybody owns a guitar, which is much more expensive
than Guitar Hero III unless you get a cheap ass piece of crap... and
even then the price is higher, just not as skewed.

And I think playing a guitar at those levels is going to be much
harder than anything you can do with Guitar Hero.

Did you ever try that Psychobilly Freakout song on Expert? Holy mother
of God... and there's some kid on YouTube who can do it with amazing
skill (that and the Dead song by My Chemical Romance, which he plays
without even looking at the television sometimes).

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:25 pm
From: The alMIGHTY N


On Nov 2, 4:17 pm, Mitch@... wrote:
> >I tried the Rock Band demo in Best Buy today. Now *that's* fun. I've
> >always liked the drums and this is the closest I'm going to get to
> >playing drums.
>
> How flimsy is the drum kit? Do you think it will hold up?

It seems to hold up pretty well. It's been there for about 2 weeks now
and everytime I go people are banging away on that thing like there's
no tomorrow. It's just a big version of those fake electronic drumkits
they sell to kids in toy stores. Four flat panel "buttons" that you
hit. The actual kit has a foot pedal as well for the big bass drum.
THAT looks hard.

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:43 pm
From: slayerman89@hotmail.com


On Nov 2, 4:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 2, 4:19 pm, slayerma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 2, 11:03 am, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 2, 2:02 pm, slayerma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 2, 9:30 am, Jonah Falcon <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 2, 11:56 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> > > > > >news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> > > > > > > "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > > >> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40, citing
> > > > > > >> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the one
> > > > > > >> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>
> > > > > > > 1 button combat?
> > > > > > > OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>
> > > > > > How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights might as
> > > > > > well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>
> > > > > Not if it's rythmic combat - which Fable 2 is using as well.
>
> > > > > It's context sensitive, and you can easily fuck up fighting. This is
> > > > > not a beat 'em up.
>
> > > > > PS. Most PC games have one button combat. (laugh)
>
> > > > I would love to see you name a good action PC game with one button
> > > > combat...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Any given FPS.
>
> > Nice try, I said name one. Any decent FPS has alternate fire modes,
> > dodges, and a slew of other things to keep your hands busy. I said
> > action game by the way, FPS's can get away with left click to shoot
> > combat only, but good ones do not. One button combat in an action game
> > would be like one button Guitar Hero.
>
> > Imagine one button combat in a Prince of Persia game, which just so
> > happens to be the same genre.
>
> Forget same genre - Assassin's Creed was developed by the exact same
> team who originally intended this to be the next Prince of Persia but
> decided to create a new IP instead.

Which is what makes the least amount of sense. Warrior Within
completely revolutionized combat from Sands of Times clunky (albeit
revolutionary in itself) fighting, and WW had no problems with AI
surrounding you and taking you down from behind, sides, above,
wherever. Right hand attacks, left hand attacks, throws, jumps, kicks,
blocks, everything was woven together so well it made combat extremely
fun and intense. AC sounds like an extremely watered down, simplified
version of PoP.

Two Thrones/Kindred Blades took that and expanded on it with speed
"assassin" kills. Those were one button attacks where the Prince would
position himself in a suitable place, time would slow down slightly,
you would press a key and it would begin. Then you would just hit the
key when the game flashed color from the black and white. It was a
spectacular break from the regular fighting, but it would be terrible
if the whole game was like that. Talk about boring.

>From the team that designed free form fighting, it's a real
disappointment.

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 5:45 pm
From: Shawk


Brenden D. Chase wrote:
> "boodybandit" <allaboutgamez@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:QLSdnf8CDLnO_rbanZ2dnUVZ_q6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:1194022004.523749.101720@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Nov 2, 12:44 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:1194021043.290917.109720@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 2, 11:56 am, "Big Daddy" <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:P7adnbpne6uI1bbanZ2dnUVZ_qiinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>> "Jonah Falcon" <jonahny...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:1194017803.196937.211090@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>> Famitsu awarded Assassin's Creed a 37 (10, 8, 9, 10) out of 40,
>>>>>>>> citing
>>>>>>>> the story, presentation, and acrobatics, while criticizing the one
>>>>>>>> button combat, map layout, and camera problems.
>>>>>>> 1 button combat?
>>>>>>> OMG say that is incorrect information please!?
>>>>>> How do you have 1 button combat? What is the point? The fights
>>>>>> might as
>>>>>> well be cutscenes if that is the case.
>>>>> Not if it's rythmic combat - which Fable 2 is using as well.
>>>>> It's context sensitive, and you can easily fuck up fighting. This is
>>>>> not a beat 'em up.
>>>>> PS. Most PC games have one button combat. (laugh)
>>>> Im all about the immersion and 1 button combats removes that for me.-
>>>> Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Says who? Have you actually played it? Single button combat may make
>>> it MORE immersive - becoming all about technique and less about button
>>> hunt-and-mash and combo memorization.
>>>
>>> But hey, if you lost interest, that's fine - more copies for the rest
>>> of us.
>> You sound like Gamespot in reverse.
>> Hey maybe you can make it a a reviewer afterall.
>> Either way 1 button combat wont appeal to a lot of people. So don't make
>> it out like I'm the minority here. Not that any of this matters because I
>> just got off the phone wit ha friend and he said this info isn't correct.
>> Ubisoft is giving you the option of one button combat but you don't have
>> to play that way. I hope he is right nad this information you posted was
>> just lost in translation.
>
> One button combat didnt hurt Space Invaders or Asteroids.


I always considered moving left and right or turning as part of the
combat in those games. I don't think I'd have got the high scores i did
back then without them...


==============================================================================
TOPIC: 5yr Old Son saved over our copy of Lego Star Wars ll? Help
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/673ff3957dd2974a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:49 pm
From: Doug Jacobs


buffyslay@gmail.com wrote:
> Help - how do i get it back? its in the console log as mostly
> completed...

Unfortunately, you can't "undelete" a save to get an older version.
You'll have to replay through all the missions and everything all over
again.

Or you could check out www.gamefaqs.com and see if they have any cheats
that would allow you to unlock everything instantly.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 5:30 pm
From: slayerman89@hotmail.com


On Nov 2, 2:25 pm, buffys...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> Our 5yr Old Son saved over our copy of Lego Star Wars ll, and now we
> cannot access the old copy which had all the missions completed so he
> could go in and play with different characters...
>
> Help - how do i get it back? its in the console log as mostly
> completed...

Format him and reinstall...


==============================================================================
TOPIC: New $99, 'compact' PS2 to arrive in 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/585c5a1123fe3172?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:52 pm
From: "Brenden D. Chase"

"AirRaid" <airraid22@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194014851.248343.257270@z9g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
sorry, i only posted half the article

I heard it's going to look exactly like the Wii


== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:53 pm
From: "Brenden D. Chase"

"Gareth Robert Halfacree" <usenet@halfacree.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5p0uioFp0sifU1@mid.individual.net...
> AirRaid wrote:
>> Tim Ingham Today, 9:48am
>> The new version has a built-in power supply for the first time in the
>> console's history - allowing the platform holder to manufacture it
>> more economically and sell it at the bargain price.
>
> But... My PS2 has a built-in PSU which just takes a figure-eight cable
> from the mains; or did they mean the first PStwo with built-in PSU?

This one will be called the PSToo and will look like the Wii. lol.


>
> And Sony accuse *Microsoft* of confusing the issue with different SKUs...
>
> --
> Gareth Halfacree
> http://gareth.halfacree.co.uk

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:55 pm
From: "Brenden D. Chase"

"Chris F" <chris@asifimtellingyoulot.com> wrote in message
news:3aomi3h0m4v1amrdp4il53dh5f1u7v9gl2@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:40:47 +0000, NiGHTS
> <nightsintodreamsYOHOLMES@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>If this is true it seems to be a strange move by Sony. Since they took
>>backwards compatibility out of the PS3 to strengthen the attach rate
>>(and presumably phase out production of PS2 games), why rerelease the
>>PS2 at this point?
>
> because it's still outselling the PS3 and the only thing that's
> keeping them afloat right now?

While yes the PS2 is making Sony money, it's hardly what's keeping them
afloat.

TVs and Cameras are where it's at right now


>>
>>On the other hand, recent PS3 adopters annoyed about the lack of PS2
>>compatibility can buy a separate console for with the money saved from
>>the price drop.
>
> if they were bothered about playing PS2 games, chances are they'd
> already have a PS2, therefore not need to buy this new version.
>
> theyre releasing this as a budget machine, just like they did when
> they repacked the original Playstation. you could argue they already
> tried this with the slim PS2, but that retailed for the same price as
> the original model.


== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:58 pm
From: Doug Jacobs


In alt.games.video.xbox NiGHTS <nightsintodreamsYOHOLMES@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> If this is true it seems to be a strange move by Sony. Since they took
> backwards compatibility out of the PS3 to strengthen the attach rate
> (and presumably phase out production of PS2 games), why rerelease the
> PS2 at this point?

Because it's making money...unlike a certain 3rd iteration of a certain
console...

> On the other hand, recent PS3 adopters annoyed about the lack of PS2
> compatibility can buy a separate console for with the money saved from
> the price drop.

Sony is basically dicking customers around by removing PS2-BC
functionality and then making it seem as if this is actually somehow a
"good" thing.

If cost really was a big deal to Sony, why didn't they nix the Wifi?

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:36 pm
From: Doug Jacobs


In alt.games.video.xbox Brenden D. Chase <brenden.chaseREMOVETHIS@gmail.com> wrote:
> TVs and Cameras are where it's at right now

Maybe so, but the margins on those aren't very good.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 5:06 pm
From: "Brenden D. Chase"

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:13ind4nnjb6eqe2@corp.supernews.com...
> In alt.games.video.xbox Brenden D. Chase
> <brenden.chaseREMOVETHIS@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TVs and Cameras are where it's at right now
>
> Maybe so, but the margins on those aren't very good.
>

The margins at the stores arent good. The margins in the factories are just
fine.


== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 5:16 pm
From: slayerman89@hotmail.com


On Nov 2, 3:58 pm, Doug Jacobs <djac...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote:
> In alt.games.video.xbox NiGHTS <nightsintodreamsYOHOL...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > If this is true it seems to be a strange move by Sony. Since they took
> > backwards compatibility out of the PS3 to strengthen the attach rate
> > (and presumably phase out production of PS2 games), why rerelease the
> > PS2 at this point?
>
> Because it's making money...unlike a certain 3rd iteration of a certain
> console...
>
> > On the other hand, recent PS3 adopters annoyed about the lack of PS2
> > compatibility can buy a separate console for with the money saved from
> > the price drop.
>
> Sony is basically dicking customers around by removing PS2-BC
> functionality and then making it seem as if this is actually somehow a
> "good" thing.
>
> If cost really was a big deal to Sony, why didn't they nix the Wifi?

They are stupid and the end user gets to reap the benefits.

Oh wait, they took out something most people would use and left in
something most people don't. Oh well, I personally use the Wifi and
could really care less about BC.

It's ricockulous.

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 6:15 pm
From: NiGHTS


Doug Jacobs wrote:
> In alt.games.video.xbox NiGHTS <nightsintodreamsYOHOLMES@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> If this is true it seems to be a strange move by Sony. Since they took
>> backwards compatibility out of the PS3 to strengthen the attach rate
>> (and presumably phase out production of PS2 games), why rerelease the
>> PS2 at this point?
>
> Because it's making money...unlike a certain 3rd iteration of a certain
> console...
>

Yes but the PS2 seems to be flourishing at the expense of the PS3.
Wouldn't cutting back on support for it effectively force people to
upgrade?

>> On the other hand, recent PS3 adopters annoyed about the lack of PS2
>> compatibility can buy a separate console for with the money saved from
>> the price drop.
>
> Sony is basically dicking customers around by removing PS2-BC
> functionality and then making it seem as if this is actually somehow a
> "good" thing.
>
> If cost really was a big deal to Sony, why didn't they nix the Wifi?
>

Well, they already admitted it wasn't really the cost but PS3 owners
were buying too many previous gen titles for their liking.

--
NiGHTS/Nightcrawler [mWo]
Fear Is The Mindkiller

"just a curtain jerking jobber here in RSPWland" -Lord Gow
"a laughably shitty shitbag" -The Teacher
"pretty pathetic" -rwa2play
"a sarcastic douchebag" -Cain
"NiGHTS is gay!!!" -Corey


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Xbox's Embarrasing History
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/905c5e8c40f5ed78?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 3:55 pm
From: "Nick Soapdish, Jr."


On Nov 2, 2:24 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> LOL
>
> This is going to be fun... it's these types of idiotic posts that get
> me through the work day haha...
>
> On Nov 2, 10:55 am, "alvinstraigh...@hotmail.com"
>
> <alvinstraigh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Xbots love to rub it in about how poorly the PS3 has performed this
> > year even daring to go so far as to compare it to the disasteristic
> > Jaguar.
>
> Actually, only one poster compared it to the Jaguar. It was an
> interesting comparison because there were quite a few parallels.
>
> > Yet one only has to dig a little into history and reveal
> > Xbox's shockingly bad history.
>
> Or your misinterpretation of it haha.
>
> > Xbox debuts in 2001 with one of those worst game libraries in gaming
> > history. Anyone remember Bruce Lee? Nightcaster? Azurik ?
>
> LOL - None of those were launch titles. That crappy Bruce Lee game
> didn't even come out until July of the following year. Azurik was
> close - about 2 weeks after launch - but Nightcaster didn't come out
> until late December.
>
> The Xbox launch titles:
>
> - Halo: Combat Evolved
> - Project Gotham Racing
> - Dead or Alive 3
> - Oddworld: Munch's Oddyssee
> - NFL Fever 2002
> - Airforce Delta Storm
> - Mad Dash Racing
> - Cel Damage
> - Arctic Thunder
> - Fusion Frenzy
>
> By the end of 2001, there were 37 Xbox games available for purchase.
> That's about twice the number of Playstation 3 games available for
> purchase at the end of 2006.
>
> > The
> > console is pricey at $300 bucks.
>
> And the Playstation 3 at $600 isn't?
>
> > Xbox is forced to drop their price a few months later
>
> Microsoft dropped the price of the Xbox in May. Sony dropped the price
> of the Playstation 3 in June and then again in October. The Xbox's
> second price drop didn't come until almost exactly a year after the
> first one.
>
> > Xbox rapes users forcing them to pay big bucks for standard extras
> > such as a dvd remote and headset.
>
> The Playstation 2 didn't come with a headset or a DVD remote so I
> guess all those PS2 fans were rape as well.
>
> > Xbox live debuts in 2002 with a mere handful of Live games. Gamers
> > have to wait almost a year before decent multiplayer titles come out.
>
> And that's better than Playstation 2 owners not having any online
> network at all and not being able to play online games for 3 years?
> Not to mention that you had to purchase a pricey network adapter until
> the later slim line model that incorporated it.
>
> > Brute Force is hyped hugely as the next great Halo type game. The
> > game is a laughable failure with an extremely short game length.
> > Fable is a similiar experience.
>
> I won't disagree with those statements. I had fun with Brute Force but
> found it a disappointment nonetheless. I couldn't get through an hour
> of Fable without giving up any hope of actually having fun.
>
> > The slogan "only on Xbox" becomes an industry joke as several of
> > Xbox's great exclusives are ported to other consoles. For example,
> > Splinter Cell found it's way on all other platforms, and even the
> > great Halo ended up on the PC with a superior version.
>
> Man, you really are dumb. Splinter Cell was never touted as an Xbox
> true exclusive. The Xbox was the target platform but everybody knew
> that the game was coming out for the Playstation 2 and GameCube from
> the get go.
>
> That's a lot better than Sony touting Unreal Tournament 3 as a true
> exclusive for a year and then having Epic announce there would be an
> Xbox 360 version only a few months afterwards.
>
> Further, a game ported to the PC is still an exclusive. When people
> talk about video games being exclusives, they only consider
> consoles... hell, people don't even say that they play video games on
> PCs... those games are specifically called PC games.
>
> > In 2005, Microsoft reveals that they literally lost billions on Xbox.
>
> And?
>
> > Microsoft decides to punish anyone who dares to mod their Xbox by
> > banning them from Live for life.
>
> Sony ran several companies out of business with the costs of lawsuits
> for emulating PSOne games.
>
> Microsoft did exactly what they should do - everybody knows that
> people modded their Xbox systems for one reason... to be able to play
> ripped games. Are you seriously going to defend people's "right" to
> pirate games, dumbass?
>
> > Just as Xbox was gathering momentum in 2005, Microsoft completely
> > drops all support in favor of Xbox 360. Xbox owners are forced to
> > update or brick their big black box.
>
> Gathering momentum? What planet are you from? The Xbox was a lost
> cause. Microsoft wasn't stupid - why keep making the console if you
> have less than 10% market share?
>

Not to interrupt, but as I stated in a different post, the Xbox market
share was much more than 10%.

http://www.news.com/Gates-considering-Xbox-clones/2100-1043_3-5770507.html


You need to stop using that "under 10%" figure, unless you can come
up with a better, contradictory cite.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:22 pm
From: Doug Jacobs


alvinstraight38@hotmail.com <alvinstraight38@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Xbox debuts in 2001 with one of those worst game libraries in gaming
> history. Anyone remember Bruce Lee? Nightcaster? Azurik ? The
> console is pricey at $300 bucks.

At least Xbox launched with Halo, which was much better than anything the
PS3 had - and arguably STILL HAS, A YEAR LATER.

$300 is "pricey"? That's the same price the PS2 debuted at. $400 is
pricey. $500 and $600 is just insane.

> Xbox rapes users forcing them to pay big bucks for standard extras
> such as a dvd remote and headset.

Arguable. First, most bundle tossed the DVD remote in for free. I agree
that DVD playability should have been something the Xbox could do out of
the box, but honestly, by the time the Xbox came out, who DIDN'T have a
standalone DVD player already?

Also, what do you say about Sony's "raping" of users by forcing them to
buy things like component or HDMI cables - something that the 360
includes. Or, how about the Rumble controller? Everyone who owns a PS3
now can look forward to spending another $50/controller to get the
controller that should have been included in the system from day one.

It's funny you mention a headset...Sony doesn't include one of those
either, but the 360 does.

> Xbox live debuts in 2002 with a mere handful of Live games. Gamers
> have to wait almost a year before decent multiplayer titles come out.

As compared to Sony's last-minute scramble to get the PS2 online? How
many PS2 titles everntually supported online play, anyways? Now, how many
Xbox titles supported online play?

> Brute Force is hyped hugely as the next great Halo type game. The
> game is a laughable failure with an extremely short game length.
> Fable is a similiar experience.

Brute Force was overhyped. Sure.

Fable, however, did fairly well. Probably one of the better titles for
the Xbox, especially if you're an RPG fan.

> The slogan "only on Xbox" becomes an industry joke as several of
> Xbox's great exclusives are ported to other consoles. For example,
> Splinter Cell found it's way on all other platforms, and even the
> great Halo ended up on the PC with a superior version.

Oh come off it. Sure, Xbox had a lot of cross/multi-platform titles, but
it still had a lot of exclusives - that remained exclusive.

I'm not even sure you can count Halo, because by the time that came out,
the Xbox was moreorless on the way out with the 360 coming along and all
that.

> In 2005, Microsoft reveals that they literally lost billions on Xbox.

> Microsoft decides to punish anyone who dares to mod their Xbox by
> banning them from Live for life.

As opposed to what, letting cheaters onto Live?

> Just as Xbox was gathering momentum in 2005, Microsoft completely
> drops all support in favor of Xbox 360. Xbox owners are forced to
> update or brick their big black box.

My Xbox still works just fine thank you. No one bricked it, or forced me
to upgrade...

> Xbox 360 launches in 2005 with only one good game - Call of Duty 2, a
> PC title. Xbox 360 would take almost a full year to release one
> decent exclusive.

Oh come off it. There were other good games for the 360 at launch.
Kameo, for instance.

Also, didn't Oblivion show up a few months after launch? Granted, it's a
PC title too... Then there was DOA4, but I think the jury's out whether
that counts as a good game or not... It was popular in Japan though ;)

And Crackdown certainly didn't come "almost a full year" later.

> Despite a year head start, on September 12, 2007, it was reported by
> the Financial Times that the Xbox 360 had been surpassed by the Wii in
> terms of worldwide console sales.

Meanwhile your precious PS3 sits in 3rd place. A DISTANT, DISMAL,
DISASTEROUS THIRD PLACE.

> Man, and you think the PS3 is doing bad?

Yeah. In fact, if things don't turn around soon, the PS3 could very well
doom Blu-Ray, and put a huge hole in Sony's finances for years to come -
if not sink the company outright.

Their PS2 from SEVEN YEARS AGO was outselling the PS3 most months, and
even now, continues to keep pace with its sales.

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: On the Concept of "Replayability" was Re: Ratchet and Clank back up
over 90%
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/c81f8b53e338c9a7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:30 pm
From: "Nick Soapdish, Jr."


On Oct 31, 11:05 pm, Tom <jimver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 31, 9:54 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 30, 8:36 pm, Tom <jimver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 30, 8:03 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 29, 10:35 pm, "Tom" <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:1193700099.988023.200810@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > > > What it needs isn't necessarily a "system seller", but more exclusive
> > > > > > games that are good, if not great. Pricing the first party games
> > > > > > competitively, like they used to do, would also help.
>
> > > > > True, but here's the issue to date. They have had exlcusives come out over
> > > > > the past 3 months, (I think) more than the 360, and a few are highly rated
> > > > > games. The issue is, there is enough hardware out for the software to sell
> > > > > very well, and that is just not happening. I wonder what the attach rate is
> > > > > right now for the PS3?
>
> > > > > For example, Heavenly Sword got pretty good scores, but has sold like crap.
> > > > > If the exclusives won't sell, people are not going to be compelled to buy
> > > > > more hardware, and hardware usually sells on word of mouth because of ther
> > > > > games. One issue I am seeing is that current Sony games are similar to PS2
> > > > > games, and it isn't translating into the world of online gaming which is at
> > > > > an alltime high, not only with PCs, but now with consoles. Now people want
> > > > > games that have online gaming/capabilities and multiplayer, not just games
> > > > > you pay in one mode and you are done with it; Sony is giving very little of
> > > > > that, if any at all. In fact, two friends of mine who were avid Sony fans
> > > > > made 360 purchases this year, my buddy next door, and a co-worker, they love
> > > > > the games and what they do, but they mainly like the exclusives that have MP
> > > > > mode and extra features.
>
> > > > > For me, I really won't get a game, unless it is an RPG (ala Oblivion) that
> > > > > keeps me interested for a long, that doesn't have online gaming modes; it is
> > > > > the reason I got into console gaming. How many times are people going to
> > > > > play HS, R&C, Folklore, Lair over and over again with getting the same
> > > > > ending and no MP mode. Do you see a great deal of replay value?. They may
> > > > > sell those games off causing a slight drop in real sales otherwise. Also
> > > > > look at the cross-platform games that were huge on the 360, that have been
> > > > > since released on the PS3, they have like a 1-10 sales ratio, and you'd
> > > > > think the PS3 owners would be buying these games to have something to play;
> > > > > something is happening, and it isn't game sales.
>
> > > > This isn't meant to be going off on you, Tom, so take it as it's
> > > > worth:
>
> > > > What the hell has the gaming world come to, where a game must have
> > > > online multiplayer to
> > > > be considered "replayable"?
>
> > > > When I was younger, the idea of "online gaming" was pretty much
> > > > unheard of, except at networks
> > > > in college and the government. Bionic Commando had no multiplayer-
> > > > that didn't keep me from replaying
> > > > it again and again, after winning it. Same with Super Mario Brothers
> > > > 3, Guerilla War, Revenge of Shinobi,
> > > > and on and on and on. Before that, I had no problem playing Commando
> > > > on my Commodore multiple times,
> > > > or Defender on my Atari 2600, despite the complete lack of
> > > > multiplayer. Games aren't just there to
> > > > "get to the ending"- it's the journey, not the destination.
>
> > > > Any game that is good enough on its own can be "replayable", barring
> > > > either serious pacing issues, a
> > > > poor setup, or genre limitations, which I see mostly affecting
> > > > survival horror games that rely more on
> > > > shocking the player as its source of entertainment. Mundane games
> > > > like Red Faction 2 or Project
> > > > Snowblind are no more replayable just because they have multiplayer.
> > > > And the big problem with games
> > > > that rely heavily on multiplayer is that they rely on the assumption
> > > > that everyone will love and continue to
> > > > play the game online forever and ever. Well, what happens if the game
> > > > flops, or if its popularity dies?
> > > > If the single player game is an afterthought, then that $60 feels
> > > > awfully wasted........
>
> > > > I certainly can understand the appeal of a multiplayer mode. But it
> > > > almost seems like reviewers place
> > > > an undue emphasis on the idea that multiplayer and replayability are
> > > > inseparable, Bioshock notwithstanding.
> > > > It feels kind of like laziness to me, as if it's a template statement
> > > > for reviewers who are more than
> > > > happy to go on cliche autopilot.
>
> > > > OK, rant over.........- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > But, this is what the world of gaming has come to, and we no longer
> > > have a choice that the interent is a huge and growing medium for
> > > gaming. I gave mostly what I say I like, and the reasons why I bought
> > > into the Xbox and the 360, because of online gaming. I didn't buy
> > > Bioshock because it didn't have MP or any extras so to speak. Games
> > > like Oblivion do appeal, because they have a lot of play time involved
> > > and can be played multiple ways; that was the point I was making
> > > really. These games for the PS3 are mimicking what PS2 games did,
> > > except many PS3 game exclusives are not including MP or anything else
> > > online, though it offers this on PSN.
>
> > > I am not knocking the PS3 games, but Sony has to appeal to the markets
> > > now, not just what I like or you like. Otherwise, what you say would
> > > have games selling of the shelves for the PS3. You do know that the
> > > past and current gens of console gaming is based and developed because
> > > of what games did online for the PC for years before, and it shows
> > > with the first Xbox and the 360.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Consider this, though- the original Xbox had a far superior online
> > component compared to the PS2,
> > yet it still came in second by a substantial margin.
>
> But, the Xbox was a year later, and the DC was all but dead, so for
> that gen the only competition was Xbox, so the PS2 had a big sales
> jump, consider also, it followed a hugely successful PS1, the Xbox was
> no follow up. But what made the Xbox great was not only the better and
> more powerful hardware, but the fact that it had a robust online
> gaming system in the works that came out nearly a year after its
> release. I think Ghost Recon offered the best look at online console
> gaming, and it stole the show, that game was freaking awesome for that
> time. Then Halo2 set the standard, but the PS2, though having the
> capabilities, followed with a fairly poor service with so few games
> that offered any online gaming, but it sold and sold big. Now, you'd
> think the Sony name would sell itself, and I think Sony kept to that.
> Though their hardware sales are getting a bit better with the PS3,
> they still are not good. But more importantly, their software sales
> downright stink, now think of the times now to then, and consider why.
>
> > The Wii is
> > already ramping up console sales, despite
> > a weak online system. There is no doubt that an online component is a
> > consideration.
>
> The Wii is a niche market, and we know what the N64 and GC did in
> sales, it wasn't all that, and give it another year or so, and you'll
> see how well it does since it is gimicky (I could be wrong though).
> Right now, it has the poorest attach rate of the 3 consoles, that says
> it's collecting dust more than being played, people won't keep buying
> it if the games are not selling.
>
> .
>
> > But what you're
> > saying sort of misses my point- online multiplayer is not a necessity
> > for something to have "replay
> > value".
>
> Tell me games like Folklore and Heavenly Sword have a lot of replay
> value, they have very little at best,

I haven't played Heavenly Sword, but if it was a good game that's
actually fun to play, and
does not have a super-scripted gameplay style (where there's very
little chance to try different
approaches, and the AI _never_ diverges from doing the same exact
thing), then, yes, it would
have replay value. That's different than "value for the money", and
if Heavenly Sword is as
short as the reviews indicate (a little more than half the length of
God of War 2), then it certainly
doesn't have value for the money. "Value for the money" is actually
what is suffering nowadays,
with games being more expensive, but having less content. This is
something that is hurting all
the systems, but Sony isn't helping itself with its sparse first party
release schedule.

Folklore is an RPG, so the "replay value" factor isn't a major one, as
RPGs are usually
long enough for the "value for the money" factor to dominate.

>and this is what is killing
> Sony, they are sticking with what was good years ago when console
> gaming didn't require a lot more than initial excitement while they
> churn out games en mass for the multitudes of PS2 owners to choose
> from, because they didn't have but one element of gaming to them,
> mainly single story play. This is different now with all the
> experience with different modes of play that PC gaming brought about.
> Online PC gaming, when about the time the PS2 came along was taking
> off fast, it was barely an infant when about the time the PS1 came
> out. But it did take off and so did the reasoning why current consoles
> are selling, they are not just single mode single story games anymore,
> and people want more because they know there is more out there now.
> People do see and think what is out when they play games you know, and
> it is going to keep changing, Sony seems to stay the course.
>

But by your argument, Sony ISN'T staying the course when it releases
Warhawk,
which has NO single player element........and that, IMO, was a big
mistake. Look at
Shadowrun, which only had a botmatch as the single player mode. It
flopped bigtime.
If you look at successful multiplayer games, they are usually either
based on a long
established brand name (e.g. Unreal) with years of goodwill behind it,
or are riding
off a successful license (e.g. Star Wars: Battlefront) and use that
license heavily. As
for Halo's success, the first game featured single player prominently,
and got a lot of
its fanbase due to the single player game. After all, the actual
number of gamers who
had the resources for the famous system link parties couldn't have
been that high.

> > As for PC online gaming dictating console gaming, I don't see
> > that, with the exception of
> > FPS games. Games like God of War and Grand Theft Auto 3 weren't
> > inspired by Quake, that's for
> > sure. And Halo, probably one of the most popular console FPS games,
> > diverged from PC FPS tradition
> > by having a fairly significant gameplay element that pulled out of the
> > first person view- vehicular combat.
>
> I am in no way dismissing what you say, but if what you say really
> follows, then PS3 sales for their most recent releases should be
> through the roof translating into big hardware sales, it isn't . They
> are doing very poorly, and I am only guessing that my assumptions are
> the reasons why; the times have changed, and Sony isn't changing.- Hide quoted text -
>

The reason is that Sony launched a year late against a competitor
which WASN'T Sega,
with an overly expensive price tag, and the most moronic pre-launch PR
seen in a while,
and the launch lineup was not really strong. It wasn't necessarily
that Sony was stuck in a
"genre rut", but that people were hoping for titles that reflected the
PS2 lineup at its strongest,
and got something that was more ho-hum.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: COD4 PS3 Version Will Be Superior to Xbox
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/fcc5db383e9c7966?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:55 pm
From: Doug Jacobs


Big Daddy <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Doug is all about exclusives. In fact he rarely makes a post without
> pointing out how there are no games to play on the ps3. He doesn't seem
> to grasp that we can actually play non-exclusives on our console.

If you actually read my posts, you'd understand why I feel console
exclusive games are going to be the deciding factor in this generation.

Unless you have an instance where a multi-platform title offers something
more over the other versions - better graphics, extra content, etc. -
there is no reason to include that title in your decision on which console
to buy.

For games on the 360 and PS3 that look and play nearly identically, the
PS3 is going to be at a disadvantage solely due to its price. The $400
PS3 will help in some regards, but losing PS2 backwards compatibility
makes it a bit of harder sell. And if Sony doesn't care about the PS2
anymore, why are they planning a $99 mini-PS2 for '08?

--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Capcom resurrects Bionic Commando (multiplatorm)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/bb5d5ca17b26354d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 4:58 pm
From: "Nick Soapdish, Jr."


On Oct 30, 6:39 pm, blue <bal...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > On Oct 30, 11:36 am, blue <bal...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >>Nick Soapdish wrote:
>
> >>>On Oct 29, 5:05 pm, "khee mao" <big_bad_buddha_da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>"The alMIGHTY N" <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1192549784.289570.19090@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>>On Oct 16, 9:55 am, AirRaid <airrai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>video announcement:

http://tinyurl.com/3278tx
> >>>>>>http://medialib.computerandvideogames.com/screens/screenshot_186769.j...
>
> >>>>>I'm a little torn on this myself. I think the concept of the new game
> >>>>>is promising. The screenshots look good. However, this shouldn't use
> >>>>>the Bionic Commando license.
>
> >>>>>Bionic Commando has a place in old school gamers' hearts because of
> >>>>>the classic, yet innovative, side scrolling platforming gameplay, the
> >>>>>tongue-in-cheek satirical presentation and storyline, and the overall
> >>>>>"fun" atmosphere of the game. It would be great to see a modernized
> >>>>>version of the game available on Xbox Live, the Playstation Network
> >>>>>and on the PC.
>
> >>>>>Doom III was a modernized take on Doom that worked even though it got
> >>>>>rid of the campy aspect of the style because it greatly expanded on
> >>>>>the horror aspect and remained a great first-person shooter
> >>>>>experience. This first-person take on Bionic Commando is a complete
> >>>>>departure from the series - coupled with the painfully obvious change
> >>>>>in style and sense, it becomes a game that is hardly recognizable as a
> >>>>>follow-up to the arcade classic.
>
> >>>>the 3d "re-imaginings" of Prince of Persia and Ninja Gaiden were ace, imho.
> >>>>Doom3 too.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>- Show quoted text -
>
> >>>Given that Ben Judd had to fight like hell for years just to get this
> >>>project going, I have faith that he will do his best to stay as true
> >>>to the Bionic Commando spirit as he can, given that it
> >>>still must be deemed as marketable in this day and age.
>
> >>>You know how that guy Air Raid feels about the Ace Combat games?
> >>>Imagine that, and multiply by 5 trillion, and you'll understand how I
> >>>feel about Bionic Commando.
>
> >>Is that the same guy who initially designed the new arm by focus group?
> >>That's certainly not care, that's not knowing what the hell you're going.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > You do realize he has bosses at Capcom he has to answer to, don't
> > you? Given that the higher-ups didn't even want to give the go-ahead
> > on this project (they thought that it wouldn't have enough mass
> > appeal), isn't it possible that he was working under certain
> > guidelines? After all, this is his first shot at leading a project,
> > and he's probably very conscious of how he needs to hit a certain
> > sales figure, or he may never get another shot at this kind of
> > position.
>
> > Everybody seems to want games to be designed in a perfect world where
> > the publishers and gamemakers are free to do whatever they want,
> > profit be damned. Unfortunately, that's not the way it works. Making
> > a game has become a lot more expensive, and the public has become more
> > fickle. As long as the game stays true enough to the original, I'll
> > be willing to bear having a character with goofy dreadlocks.
>
> Your argument is exactly what seperates an average artist from a great
> one. It takes somebody with the will not to compromise to make something
> great in any medium, the history books are littered with people who had
> to fight tooth and nail to get their point across.
>
> The focus groups are there to inform the descisions not make them. You
> don't lead a team at all if your decisions are made by others.- Hide quoted text -
>

Oh, please, not the old "great artists stick to their guns" argument.
Putting aside any debate as to whether video games are truly
"art" (that's a can of worms right there), your statement is a huge
generalization. Judd is not in the position of a musician or painter
who owns their own intellectual property/art- he is a Capcom staff
member, and Capcom- not Ben Judd- OWNS the Bionic Commando name and
concept. He has even less flexibility than a movie director, who
isn't "in house". If the executives at the top tell him to use a
focus group, he doesn't have much choice. What are his alternatives?
He could refuse to do it, and Capcom will say, "Fine. Let's get a new
producer for this project." Or he could refuse, and Capcom will say,
"You know, this project is already too troublesome- I think we'll can
it." And then we get no new Bionic Commando game, because only Capcom
has the rights to the license.

I admire your passion for keepin' it real in the fight against Master
D- but your outlook is a tad naive, and unrealistic. Keep in mind
that The Fountainhead is just fiction, eh?


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Are There Plans On Releasing The PC content On XBL Of Gears Of War
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/browse_thread/thread/5fc8a89c6661b347?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 2 2007 5:53 pm
From: "JOE"

"Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:1194017856.854499.207090@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 2, 11:20 am, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > "JOE" <warth...@verizon.net> wrote in
messagenews:93GWi.2$Rg1.0@trnddc05...
> > > I just saw the ad for the Pc release of gears of war. It mentions it
has 5
> > > more chapters for the single player campaign. Which is supposed to add
> > > more
> > > story & I think a new enemy. Has anyone heard if these are going to be
> > > released for the 360 sometime? I'm hoping for xbox live and not a game
of
> > > the year edition if they do.
> > > I know my Pc won't be able to handle the game.
> >
> > Nope. The additional content isn't coming to XBL.
> > It almost makes me want to purchase a better video card so I can play it
on
> > my pc.
>
> PC Gamer says there's a bit of mental disconnect when playing Gears of
> War on the PC. Like something's not quite right.
>
Bummer, I was hoping to play the extra levels. I loved the game but can't
see myself buying another copy for maybe 1 hour of extra content.


==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.games.video.xbox"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.games.video.xbox-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.xbox/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en

No comments: