PDA

View Full Version : Haze still multiformat - Doak



deded999
05-25-2007, 05:43 AM
As expected then - looks like the PS3 version will launch first, followed by the others.


Free Radical's David Doak has told Eurogamer that Haze is being developed for multiple formats after all - it's just leading on PlayStation 3.

"We're working on development on all platforms, so we will bring the other ones along," Doak told us at UbiDays in Paris yesterday. "It's just looking at the way to best get a return on the investment of making the game."

"I think there's an opportunity there to create a new brand and push new IP and PlayStation 3 looks like a good place to do that at the moment.

"There's obviously the performance - the machine's a very capable machine - and I think we're pretty well-placed to take advantage of it because we've got a good history on PlayStation 2 so we're not frightened by some of the things causing people a bit of alarm," the developer - a veteran of projects like GoldenEye - explained.

Publisher Ubisoft had previously been coy about confirming the game's multiformat status, with US reports pointing to a "hazy" future for Xbox 360 and PC versions yesterday.

The FPS, which takes place in 2048 and sees players working for the globe-spanning Mantel Corporation in a battle against South American rebels, aims to show us the shades of grey that make up the war palette, dealing with more than the usual range of gaming emotions. It also features four-player story-mode co-op across the duration of its 15-hour campaign.


Eurogamer (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=76830)

deded999
05-25-2007, 06:01 AM
Well, to quote Eurogamer again,


Ubisoft has revealed that Haze will launch on PS3 this autumn. No mention was made of the previously announced Xbox 360 and PC versions.

It depends what you mean by Autumn I suppose? My guess is around October-ish, maybe a little later for the PS3. That could mean a little later, or around Christmas for the other formats. Hopefully it won't stretch to 08.

sanderDrost
05-25-2007, 06:09 AM
IGN has the european release on 28 september and the US realease on Q4.

deded999
05-25-2007, 06:34 AM
Hmmm, cheers for that, but I wouldn't put too much stock in release dates, especially unofficial ones months before-hand. As long as it's out this year I'll be happy.

sanderDrost
05-25-2007, 06:56 AM
yea i know im just waiting for it to come in december or something, then it'll only be better when it comes out sooner. and i dont expect it later then that.

BuddyFlashheart
05-25-2007, 07:27 AM
"There's obviously the performance - the machine's a very capable machine - and I think we're pretty well-placed to take advantage of it because we've got a good history on PlayStation 2 so we're not frightened by some of the things causing people a bit of alarm," the developer - a veteran of projects like GoldenEye - explained.

"People"... like Ubisoft then? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

sygmazx7
05-25-2007, 07:36 AM
"
Does anyone knw when its coming out globally?

Jtyettis
05-25-2007, 08:33 AM
Sweet

Rasomaso
05-25-2007, 09:21 AM
September 28?
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

I hope that is true... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

deded999
05-25-2007, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by BuddyFlashheart:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"There's obviously the performance - the machine's a very capable machine - and I think we're pretty well-placed to take advantage of it because we've got a good history on PlayStation 2 so we're not frightened by some of the things causing people a bit of alarm," the developer - a veteran of projects like GoldenEye - explained.

"People"... like Ubisoft then? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm, possibly, but not necessarily. If you look at some of the comments that have come out of Valve, (amongst others), recently on PS3 development, maybe that's a subtle swipe at the competition. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Does anyone know when its coming out globally?

Nobody knows when it's coming out on PS3 yet, besides a vague Autumn/late 07, never mind the other systems. Patience Padawan.

TerranUp16
05-25-2007, 09:53 AM
Pretty much every company other than Factor 5 has been complaining about the PS3 b/c they have not really fully committed to it the way Factor 5 and Free Radical have. Though FR is making a multi-platform game, it's obvious that they are taking the necessary time to work with the PS3 the way it needs to be, and those such as Valve and Bethesda are just viewing it as another platform to put their game on.

BuddyFlashheart
05-25-2007, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
Pretty much every company other than Factor 5 has been complaining about the PS3 b/c they have not really fully committed to it the way Factor 5 and Free Radical have. Though FR is making a multi-platform game, it's obvious that they are taking the necessary time to work with the PS3 the way it needs to be, and those such as Valve and Bethesda are just viewing it as another platform to put their game on.

Criterion seems to like the system. But then Criterion, like FRD here, has a history working with and getting great results from Playstation hardware. I guess when you're used to galloping through tar, mud won't bother you much.

deded999
05-25-2007, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
Pretty much every company other than Factor 5 has been complaining about the PS3 b/c they have not really fully committed to it the way Factor 5 and Free Radical have. Though FR is making a multi-platform game, it's obvious that they are taking the necessary time to work with the PS3 the way it needs to be, and those such as Valve and Bethesda are just viewing it as another platform to put their game on.

True, but don't forget Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Ninja Theory, Media Molecule, Squenix; devs that are open to PS3 programming don't seem to have a problem. And Bethesda seemed to do a good job with Oblivion.

TerranUp16
05-25-2007, 11:03 AM
Oblivion lacked some of the graphical oomph on the PS3 that it had on the 360, which according to a few of the more pro-PS3 devs should not happen. Anyway, case in point about how truly delving into the hardware can make a huge difference, there have been cases where PS2 games turned out graphically better than Xbox games, even though the Xbox was clearly the more powerful console, purely due in part to the OpenGL graphics API but also b/c the PS2, with some work, was better with textures.

jac494
05-25-2007, 12:20 PM
If they want to make money on their hard work they would be fools not to take it to the 360/PC. I really would enjoy playing this I think, I refuse to buy a PS3 cause its overrated garbage in my opinion. All it says is that its going to debut on PS3 this fall. Remember all the GTA's started on PS2 but Xbox got them, though I hope we dont have to wait that long. Ubi has a really good thing going with 360 so it would be bad business to short a huge part of your business dealings, a title that would more likely make you more money on a 360 than on a PS3.

logos01
05-25-2007, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by jac494:
If they want to make money on their hard work they would be fools not to take it to the 360/PC. I really would enjoy playing this I think, I refuse to buy a PS3 cause its overrated garbage in my opinion. All it says is that its going to debut on PS3 this fall. Remember all the GTA's started on PS2 but Xbox got them, though I hope we dont have to wait that long. Ubi has a really good thing going with 360 so it would be bad business to short a huge part of your business dealings, a title that would more likely make you more money on a 360 than on a PS3.
Yea I agree the 360 has a more suitable market for this game. But maybe the PS3 is selling like crazy in EU or something, in NA the PS3 sells less than 100,000 units a month. This game won't do nearly as good on the 360 if it's delayed, and GTA:VC is a good example of why delayed games don't sell so well on the delayed platform. If there was a bigger market on the PS3 I'd understand, but I don't think the popularity of going against Halo3 will push it that much on ps3 because most ps3 owners that I know care mostly for RPGs, and that extends to many ps3 owners of which there are still relatively few. They should just launch on all 3 platform this year, the game looks promising and I'm not the only one looking forward to playing it on the xbox360.

LiquidEagle
05-25-2007, 06:56 PM
Hey, don't forget Kojima Productions if you want to talk about devs stepping up to PS3's plate! MGS4... *drool*

There's a reason why HAZE is #2 on my most anticipated list... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

TerranUp16
05-25-2007, 07:16 PM
On the GameSpot vid featuring the interview of Doack, he says, near the end, "Our big focus for this year is PS3."

Desmond25
05-26-2007, 01:05 AM
To be honest, I can see why Haze is made such a big deal into being a "timely exclusive".

The main purpose is to counter Halo 3 for the time being till the dust settles and let GTA IV come out, and let the dust settle again.

When everything looks clear.. boom Haze comes out for 360.

Ubisoft doesn't like PS3'ers man.

deded999
05-26-2007, 04:13 AM
Originally posted by Desmond25:
Ubisoft doesn't like PS3'ers man.

Rubbish. They are a company trying to make money, I'm sure console 'preference' doesn't make it into their calculations, (or more fool them if it does). And if that were true why lead on PS3? That doesn't mean your main argument is incorrect, but don't make the mistake of thinking the 360 is the be-all end-all of platforms for Haze.

nu_ignition
05-26-2007, 06:31 AM
http://uk.gamespot.com/ps3/action/haze/news.html?sid=6171219

No HAZE for the 360 or PC in 2007.

I probably won't be getting HAZE anymore, if it's not out on the 360 by Christmas then I won't be able to afford it until June 08, and I don't buy online games that have been out for a while (I learnt my mistake with TS:FP).

Timed Sony exclusive until after Christmas? It's BG&E all over again....

deded999
05-26-2007, 07:50 AM
That's old-ish news - there have been updates since, including the OP, although none are very clear on a release date; Autumn has been suggested, which would still allow the possibility of an 07 release for 360/PC. Realistically though, there was still a chance that none of the versions would be out until early 08 anyway - I suppose this is still a possibility knowing game release slippage as we do...

TerranUp16
05-26-2007, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by nu_ignition:
I probably won't be getting HAZE anymore, if it's not out on the 360 by Christmas then I won't be able to afford it until June 08, and I don't buy online games that have been out for a while (I learnt my mistake with TS:FP).

Oh? And what was wrong with TS: FP? Admittedly I have the GameCube version so online really isn't a major factor (I've given it plenty of multiplayer hours though- it's quite a popular game and has made my house the preferred when we're talking about playing video games, lol).

TerranUp16
05-26-2007, 01:41 PM
Sorry for the double post, but I was reading an interview from CVG with Doack. Here's what he said about Halo:
"Clearly on 360 you're going to be going up against the juggernought that is Halo. It's wise to not be standing in the middle of the road when it comes towards you because there's nothing bigger on Xbox. In many ways Halo 3 has already won that battle before it's even really started."

Also, here's what he said on the PS3:
"Its strengths are obviously that is has a lot of processing power. Its weaknesses are that its processing power is locked away at the moment. But everyone's going to hit that wall across all platforms at first.

But as people continue to make bigger and faster games, this will change as the technology isn't scaleable anymore because everything's going to be multi-core. It's not going to be two or four processors; it's going to be 64. And everybody is going to have to learn to make software for that and that's the big challenge that everyone faces.

Developers are looking for skills that you can't get off the shelf anymore. Our best developers at Free Radical have leant those skills at the company, not anywhere else."

And, because I'm a fan of the Wii:
"Nintendo said it was going to do something that would be great fun out of the box, and it was. And even my mum wants to play it and nobody reckoned my mum would ever be a possible consumer."

deded999
05-26-2007, 04:15 PM
Interesting, and these comments certainly point towards one of the speculated reasons for Haze to be debuting later than expected on the 360...

Off-topic really, but Re; Wii, sure, your mum wants to play it, but would she know a good game if it came up and bit her on the proverbial? I've been terribly disappointed in the Wii, which may very well drag in all the non-gamers, but to play what exactly? Besides Zelda, (a GC game), and I suppose Wii Sports, (two semi-decent mini games plus a couple of also-rans masquerading as a great and original game), the Wii has been a massive flop games-wise IMO. And people say the PS3 lacks games... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I got one at launch and haven't touched it in months, since I finished Zelda, which I should have bought on the GC, which I already had. I'd be interested to know just how many of those newly-bought Wii's are just sitting in people's homes gathering dust now the Wii Sports craze has died down...

LiquidEagle
05-26-2007, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by deded999:
Interesting, and these comments certainly point towards one of the speculated reasons for Haze to be debuting later than expected on the 360...

Off-topic really, but Re; Wii, sure, your mum wants to play it, but would she know a good game if it came up and bit her on the proverbial? I've been terribly disappointed in the Wii, which may very well drag in all the non-gamers, but to play what exactly? Besides Zelda, (a GC game), and I suppose Wii Sports, (two semi-decent mini games plus a couple of also-rans masquerading as a great and original game), the Wii has been a massive flop games-wise IMO. And people say the PS3 lacks games... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I got one at launch and haven't touched it in months, since I finished Zelda, which I should have bought on the GC, which I already had. I'd be interested to know just how many of those newly-bought Wii's are just sitting in people's homes gathering dust now the Wii Sports craze has died down...

hehe, I bought Twilight Princess for me Cube http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I'm in the same boat as you pretty much regarding my feelings towards the Wii. As somebody who loves games and has loved them for a long time, I can't help but look at the Wii as though it's not meant for me at all. In appealing to the casual/non-gamer crowd I think the games take a turn for the shallow side of the spectrum, and are also (IMO) less artistically expressive... it's like teen movies or something that are made just to be fun for the hell of it.

nu_ignition isn't really having a go at TS:FP, he's more (I think) lamenting that he bought the game a little while after it came out, so when he went online it was new to him but not to anybody else, and all the cheats & stuff were already widespread. That's what I'm thinking he meant.

Also, in regards to Ubi Soft not liking the PS3 -- I wouldn't go that far, but I don't think it's a stretch to say they're having a really hard time grasping it. They're the main company right now that is porting games to PS3 with very little care, and they continue to delay these ports like R6 Vegas that were supposed to be near-launch titles. Also with Assassin's Creed, they aren't taking advantage of the controller or the hardware at all, instead aiming to making the 360/PS3 versions indistinguishable in all ways. That's not what I got my PS3 for http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Fortunately, as has already been said by others (and myself), FRD is making it, and as Neko said, they get great results on Sony hardware, and I have no doubt they'll get great results on 360/PC too. Worry not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

deded999
05-27-2007, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by LiquidEagle:
in regards to Ubi Soft not liking the PS3 -- I wouldn't go that far, but I don't think it's a stretch to say they're having a really hard time grasping it. They're the main company right now that is porting games to PS3 with very little care, and they continue to delay these ports like R6 Vegas that were supposed to be near-launch titles. Also with Assassin's Creed, they aren't taking advantage of the controller or the hardware at all, instead aiming to making the 360/PS3 versions indistinguishable in all ways. That's not what I got my PS3 for http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif


Well that's a different kettle of fish entirely, and I don't think I'd disagree with that...

nu_ignition
05-27-2007, 03:28 AM
I played TS:FP online solid for a whole year, so it's not to do with hating it. It's just by that point the servers were getting laggier and a lot of the good players had left, meaning the whole experience wasn't half as good as it could have been if I got it close to launch.

As online games get older, they generally get worse.

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by deded999:
Off-topic really, but Re; Wii, sure, your mum wants to play it, but would she know a good game if it came up and bit her on the proverbial? I've been terribly disappointed in the Wii, which may very well drag in all the non-gamers, but to play what exactly? Besides Zelda, (a GC game), and I suppose Wii Sports, (two semi-decent mini games plus a couple of also-rans masquerading as a great and original game), the Wii has been a massive flop games-wise IMO. And people say the PS3 lacks games... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I got one at launch and haven't touched it in months, since I finished Zelda, which I should have bought on the GC, which I already had. I'd be interested to know just how many of those newly-bought Wii's are just sitting in people's homes gathering dust now the Wii Sports craze has died down...

The Wii has problems similar to the PS3 game-wise, but recall that the 360, since the release of CoD 2, really didn't have another big game until Oblivion came out. The Wii already has a big game with Zelda, and Nintendo is still working on their big guns. The thing with the Wii is that really, it is just such a different platform for so many designers and developers. It trumps the PS3 in terms of how different it is and how that affects developers. Developers have to take a totally different viewpoint when developing for the Wii. Another of the Wii's major issues at the moment is that no one expected it to be where it is now. No one expected it to be top dog. No developer- not even Nintendo- predicted this. Thus, most developers have really just been porting to the Wii or making half-assed efforts. That won't continue. Metroid Prime 3 already sounds excellent, as does Mario Galaxy, and you know Super Smash Bros. Brawl will be awesome. Third party support should really begin stepping-up now given where the Wii is, so I'd expect to finally see some worthy third party games soon as well.

Also, in terms of casual gamers- we all started out as casual gamers. It doesn't matter if they don't know what a good game is at first. The key is that they are playing games. As they delve deeper into the world of gaming, they'll move beyond that "naive" state. By the time they do that, I'm thinking the Wii will have games to satisfy that transition. The Wii is having a major, undeniable impact on attracting a lot of people who would never have thought of playing games before it, and I feel I could safely predict that the Wii might well double the amount of gamers worldwide by the end of its tenure. This is why Nintendo of America now feels that the Wii will remain strong until 2012. They'll continue releasing games, and continue dropping the price of the console, and they'll continue to pull in new gamers. Some dismiss the Wii's power to survive until then, but that's really only five years, and theoretically Sony and MS should only be getting ready to release their new consoles then. If they release them before that... I'm thinking we should all just get PCs as it would be cheaper (especially b/c PC games are still only $50 as opposed to the insane $60 for the 360 and PS3).

deded999
05-27-2007, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
Also, in terms of casual gamers- we all started out as casual gamers. It doesn't matter if they don't know what a good game is at first. The key is that they are playing games. As they delve deeper into the world of gaming, they'll move beyond that "naive" state. By the time they do that, I'm thinking the Wii will have games to satisfy that transition. The Wii is having a major, undeniable impact on attracting a lot of people who would never have thought of playing games before it, and I feel I could safely predict that the Wii might well double the amount of gamers worldwide by the end of its tenure. This is why Nintendo of America now feels that the Wii will remain strong until 2012. They'll continue releasing games, and continue dropping the price of the console, and they'll continue to pull in new gamers. Some dismiss the Wii's power to survive until then, but that's really only five years, and theoretically Sony and MS should only be getting ready to release their new consoles then. If they release them before that... I'm thinking we should all just get PCs as it would be cheaper (especially b/c PC games are still only $50 as opposed to the insane $60 for the 360 and PS3).

That's reasonable - personally I just feel completely underwhelmed by it, (so far at least). I seem to remember similar promises about the N64 and GC re: great third-party games coming, but the Wii at least stands out as completely different to the other systems, so maybe they will get their act together. I suppose at the end of the day I'm just not a huge fan of Nintendo games, which doesn't help! The real question for me is whether those new gamers will ever feel the desire to turn the thing on again once the Wii Sports craze has died down. Buying into playing Tennis is one thing, playing a 'traditional' videogame, like Mario, may be a step too far for some of these people.

I can imagine Dave Doak making a Wii game though - he certainly sounds quite struck by it in interviews.

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 10:49 AM
The difference between the Wii and the GC though is that the Wii is number one, whereas the GC was number three. Third party developers will not leave the number one bereft of good games or good support for long.

In terms of the casual gamers, they'll get sucked-in by Wii Sports and whatnot, and then games like Mario Tennis and Mario Kart will come along and they'll get sucked into those, and then they'll get sucked into more traditional Mario games and then... the Wii provides a more accessible control scheme for many, and makes, to them at least, many of the hardcore games more feasible propositions.

But I seriously cannot wait for a Timesplitters installment on the Wii. Once the online service really gets going, it will be the perfect platform for one (the alternative artistic design should appeal to many Wii owners as well as its high-intensity gameplay, and the Wiimote seems perfect for a Timesplitters game).

frd_neko
05-27-2007, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
The difference between the Wii and the GC though is that the Wii is number one, whereas the GC was number three. Third party developers will not leave the number one bereft of good games or good support for long.

In terms of the casual gamers, they'll get sucked-in by Wii Sports and whatnot, and then games like Mario Tennis and Mario Kart will come along and they'll get sucked into those, and then they'll get sucked into more traditional Mario games and then... the Wii provides a more accessible control scheme for many, and makes, to them at least, many of the hardcore games more feasible propositions.

Mm, thing is, that's speculation - the thing that I think is concerning a lot of publishers at the moment about the Wii is that yes, it's selling well and to casual gamers. However, there's no evidence that these casual gamers are interested in buying anything beyond Wii Sports and maybe a Brain Training game when it comes out. In other words, publishers are concerned that the Wii's fantastic hardware sales figures don't necessarily translate into succesful software sales figures.

That might not turn out to be the case, but I think it's that doubt that is making a lot of publishers and developers diving in with two feet right now. However, it's clear that there's increasing amounts of support coming the way of Nintendo's console, and to be honest I really do hope they make a success of it, 'cos it's a brave, smart move by them, and like Dave, I still love owning a console that my Mum wants to play as much as I do. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Neko.

deded999
05-27-2007, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
The difference between the Wii and the GC though is that the Wii is number one, whereas the GC was number three. Third party developers will not leave the number one bereft of good games or good support for long.

It's number two, behind the 360 - I do take the 360 sales numbers with a pinch of salt, but I still think this is the case.


In terms of the casual gamers, they'll get sucked-in by Wii Sports and whatnot, and then games like Mario Tennis and Mario Kart will come along and they'll get sucked into those, and then they'll get sucked into more traditional Mario games and then... the Wii provides a more accessible control scheme for many, and makes, to them at least, many of the hardcore games more feasible propositions.

I think you're over-estimating the neo-casuals (I coined a new one there ;D) desire to play all these games. Why would they buy a new tennis game if they already have one? IMO, many of the more traditional games won't appeal to them - if they did, they would already have bought another system. I don't think the Brain Training/Nintendogs crowd will cross over quite as easily as that. Metroid will be a big test of the Wii's control abilities on more complex 3D games, although I don't doubt that it's capable of it with the right system.


But I seriously cannot wait for a Timesplitters installment on the Wii. Once the online service really gets going, it will be the perfect platform for one (the alternative artistic design should appeal to many Wii owners as well as its high-intensity gameplay, and the Wiimote seems perfect for a Timesplitters game).

Hmm. Maybe that will happen, but maybe it won't. IMO if it does happen it will be a Wii-unique version or companion to a HD console(s) version. I think if Doak/FRD did make a game for Wii, it may very well be a new IP. I would buy a new Timesplitters on whichever system it happened to appear on, but I would expect (and hope) to see it on the HD consoles before I saw it on the Wii.

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 11:34 AM
The Wii is number 2 only in a superficial respect- it's been around for a year less than the 360, and yet its sales rate exceeds that of the 360 at any point, and even 6 months after launch you still have to wait in line at 8am at a store's opening to get one.

Anyway, it's certainly a valid concern of whether the new casual gamers will delve into the more hardcore games, but when you really look at Wii Sports, yes it is simplistic but it has all the makings of a stepping stone. It's shallow and accessible enough to pull in new gamers, but deep enough to give a hint as to what the Wii can truly offer. Speaking with those whom I'd consider new gamers regularly during bouts of Wii Sports and whatnot, many do wish to delve into something deeper. They like Wii Sports, but they want more control- they want more realistic tennis, they want something deeper, they want more options, etc... Wii Tennis opens the door for something like Mario Tennis. A casual gamer hears about such a title and goes, "Oh, well, yes, I very much liked the Wii Sports version of this, and this seems to be a much better game, I think I shall give it a try." That's all it takes.

As for a new Timesplitters... I'd love to see it purely on the Wii, but if it absolutely must be on the nex-gen consoles, then I certainly hope that it will be on the PC as well (as Haze is), given that I'm not alone among the new number who are forgoing the newer consoles and who are going with a Wii and a PC (or for some just a PC).

deded999
05-27-2007, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
The Wii is number 2 only in a superficial respect- it's been around for a year less than the 360, and yet its sales rate exceeds that of the 360 at any point, and even 6 months after launch you still have to wait in line at 8am at a store's opening to get one.

I'll grant you that, up to a point.


Speaking with those whom I'd consider new gamers regularly during bouts of Wii Sports and whatnot, many do wish to delve into something deeper. They like Wii Sports, but they want more control- they want more realistic tennis, they want something deeper, they want more options, etc... Wii Tennis opens the door for something like Mario Tennis. A casual gamer hears about such a title and goes, "Oh, well, yes, I very much liked the Wii Sports version of this, and this seems to be a much better game, I think I shall give it a try." That's all it takes.

I'd agree with that - however, I think that's more representative of the shortcomings of Wii Tennis. I would question which they would then choose if shown Mario Tennis and Virtua Tennis 3. IMO if shown VT3, and having played it, they may very well forget about Mario Tennis altogether, (and that's not just a comment on the graphics either - IMO VT3 plays a far FAR better game of Tennis than Wii Tennis ever could. The only plus to Wii Tennis is the swing-a-racquet control system IMO). That's kind of my problem with the Wii - if you take away the control system, it has very little to recommend it. Obviously the control system is there, but I still question how great it is and whether or not it will usher in this new dawn of gaming, or simply become another good idea that didn't change the world.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing the Wii for the sake of it, I just still believe that the Emperor's New Clothes/Nintendo Media Flame-shield remains in full effect; take this preview of RE4: Wii Edition from 'Gaming Bible' Edge for instance:


Indeed, what the game's arrival on Wii mostly demonstrates is how badly that system is still lacking truly meaty gaming experiences. It may not be representative of the core philosophy behind the console, but RE4's arrival on Wii is likely to show up current contenders - the Red Steels and the Rival Swords, indeed almost everything other than Twilight Princess - as lacking in ambition, scale and simple excellence.

So not a glowing impression of the system then? But wait! The previewer then goes on to drop this in as the finale:


Indeed, if nothing else, it's a perfect expression of just how radical the Wii is: can you think of another successful console whose best looking game was 2 years old and developed for the previous hardware generation?

Radical? I nearly spat out my damn cornflakes! (Yes, I can - it's called the Wii and it refers just as well to Zelda as it does to RE4!) Otherwise no I can't, but is that supposed to be a good thing? Nintendo must be laughing their ******* heads off that they can get away with this ****. Talk about money for old rope...

(My apologies BTW - this is miles off-topic, but I'll argue about the Wii with anyone 'til I'm blue in the face. /checks mirror/ Yep, blue alright. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 12:25 PM
Manslaughter 2 is actually supposed to be more violent on the Wii than on anything else.

Anyway, I was going to get VT3 on the PC, but since getting the Wii I seriously cannot imagine playing a tennis game with anything but a Wiimote.

frd_neko
05-27-2007, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by deded999:
I'd agree with that - however, I think that's more representative of the shortcomings of Wii Tennis. I would question which they would then choose if shown Mario Tennis and Virtua Tennis 3. IMO if shown VT3, and having played it, they may very well forget about Mario Tennis altogether, (and that's not just a comment on the graphics either - IMO VT3 plays a far FAR better game of Tennis than Wii Tennis ever could. The only plus to Wii Tennis is the swing-a-racquet control system IMO). That's kind of my problem with the Wii - if you take away the control system, it has very little to recommend it. Obviously the control system is there, but I still question how great it is and whether or not it will usher in this new dawn of gaming, or simply become another good idea that didn't change the world.

Thing is though, as you say, the control system is there, and it ain't going anywhere. But I really disagree with the way you're underplaying the importance of the control system in Wii Tennis - sure, it's the only difference between that and a hundred other tennis games, but what a difference it is! It's like saying 'Well, I've only got one car' when that car's a Ferrari! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Er, I don't have a Ferrari by the way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anyway, the importance of the control scheme is this. Every time we play a game, our brain makes the abstraction from the buttons we press on the controller, to the results we see on screen. That's fine for us as gamers - we're used to it. But for other people, it's a leap they struggle to make. Now, in Wii tennis, rather than pressing a button to make your character swing his arm, you swing your arm to make your character swing his arm. Suddenly the abstraction is massively reduced, and that to me is the reason it's so compelling. It's also the reason that I fundamentally believe that motion-sensitive control has the potential to make for gaming experiences more immersive than ever before.

The proof for me with the Wii was over Christmas, where friends and family alike were phoning me up to come and have a go on the console as they'd 'Seen it and it looked a lot of fun' - that has never happened to me before with any other console I've owned. The motion-sensitive control is a huge difference between Wii Sports and any other sports game I've ever played, and it's significance simply can't be underplayed, imo.


Radical? I nearly spat out my damn cornflakes! (Yes, I can - it's called the Wii and it refers just as well to Zelda as it does to RE4!) Otherwise no I can't, but is that supposed to be a good thing? Nintendo must be laughing their ******* heads off that they can get away with this ****. Talk about money for old rope...

I don't think he's saying it necessarily is a good thing, merely that it highlights how different the Wii is to the other consoles, for better or worse.

Neko.

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 12:53 PM
Aye, the key with the Wii is that its control scheme foments immersion. Graphics are also a form of immersion. The Wii compensates for its lacking graphics with the more potent form of immersion via control. The control scheme, as Neko described, subverts the abstraction that most games use. Those who have actually played tennis, can pick up Wii Tennis and instantly feel at home- I'm among that crowd. I was a huge fan of VT1 and VT2 (until my DC stopped working). However, I feel that Wii Tennis would more likely than not garner most of my play time simply because of the control scheme- even though VT3 might be a vastly superior game. Give me VT3 with the Wiimote and...

Xylaquin
05-27-2007, 01:04 PM
I'm not sure about the Wii, it's a physical gaming console. At first I was thinking it'd be like the EyeToy: cool at first but gradually loose it's interest.

IMHE, physical activites in consoles tend to appeal to non-hardcore gamers.

But this is getting offtopic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif let's talk about the exclusive-issue-thing.

TerranUp16
05-27-2007, 01:19 PM
Hasn't the exclusivity already been resolved?

Anyway, Neko and I just basically described why the "physicality" of the Wii and other such devices appeal more to casual gamers. The trick though is that the Wii can turn that same power of immersion towards hardcore games, so that it should be able to satisfy both crowds. The Wiimote provides the best console set-up for shooters atm, as well as the best set-up for sports games. It justs needs to capitalize on that.

Btw, though the Wii looks tiring, it actually, amazingly, is not. I actually get more tired from the mental exertion required for Company of Heroes than I do from playing Wii Sports hours on end.

LiquidEagle
05-27-2007, 01:54 PM
The boxing tires the **** out of me and when tennis gets intense between my friend & I it gets tiring, but yeah, otherwise it's no biggie.

It does have a great set up for shooters, but we've yet to see that in action http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Anyhoo... HAZE is multiplatform. End of this thread, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

deded999
05-28-2007, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by frd_neko:
Thing is though, as you say, the control system is there, and it ain't going anywhere. But I really disagree with the way you're underplaying the importance of the control system in Wii Tennis - sure, it's the only difference between that and a hundred other tennis games, but what a difference it is! It's like saying 'Well, I've only got one car' when that car's a Ferrari! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I think the reason I'm underplaying it so much in this case is because - for me at least - the control system is far more immersive, I'll grant you, but I don't feel there is anywhere near the same level of shot control in Wii T as there is in something like VT3. Immersion is all very well, but control is also key, and in a game where I can swing my 'racquet' to hit the ball, but don't feel like the way I hit it really matters, it loses a lot of the immersion it had gained for me. Again though, that's probably a more valid criticism of Wii Tennis than the control system.


Anyway, the importance of the control scheme is this. Every time we play a game, our brain makes the abstraction from the buttons we press on the controller, to the results we see on screen. That's fine for us as gamers - we're used to it. But for other people, it's a leap they struggle to make. Now, in Wii tennis, rather than pressing a button to make your character swing his arm, you swing your arm to make your character swing his arm. Suddenly the abstraction is massively reduced, and that to me is the reason it's so compelling. It's also the reason that I fundamentally believe that motion-sensitive control has the potential to make for gaming experiences more immersive than ever before.

As long as motion-control can extend itself into the areas necessary for a multitude of games, then yes, I agree...


The proof for me with the Wii was over Christmas, where friends and family alike were phoning me up to come and have a go on the console as they'd 'Seen it and it looked a lot of fun' - that has never happened to me before with any other console I've owned. The motion-sensitive control is a huge difference between Wii Sports and any other sports game I've ever played, and it's significance simply can't be underplayed, imo.

Neko.

I had similar experiences myself - (having your mum battering your virtual face and screaming DIE! DIE! was a new experience for me - Merry Xmas!). The only point I'd make would be that, sure, for Wii Sports the controller abstraction is very low, swing that stick basically, and anyone can do it, but as you go on to more complex games the differences between the Wiimote and other controllers starts to disappear, and the abstraction level increases. Take Metroid for example: I would imagine you would need to use pretty much all of the controls available on the Wiimote and Nunchuk, that's 11 buttons, one wand and an analog stick. Now that's not up to the levels of say, the Sixaxis, with it's 14 buttons, two analogs and Sixaxis motion, but it isn't far off, so I think as you get beyond the simple party/sports-based pull-em-in games, the simplicity of the control system begins to wane somewhat and the abstraction level will jump back up. Having said that, pointing the wand at an enemy and pulling the trigger may very well feel more immersive than merely 'looking' at it and pulling the trigger, (although years of FPS play may negate that).

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif

TerranUp16
05-28-2007, 08:44 AM
The Wii can never use all 11 of it's buttons, but it doesn't need to given that both its nunchuck and wiimote are motion-sensitive and those add extra buttons without actually adding buttons.

Anyway, Wii Tennis just focuses purely on timing. However, that is not to say that something like VT3 could not allow players to swing their Wiimote so as to achieve varying shots by how they swing (personally I'd prefer to just be able to swing the Wiimote and let physics go to work, but this is where the Wii's relatively low processing capacity comes to light and is one area where Nintendo should have thought a little more, but the Wii is admittedly a stepping stone and not the endpoint).

If your mom is going, "DIE! DIE!" then apparently she was quite into the game and very much so enjoying herself- I'd definitely say that she would be a likely candidate to extend her preference into deeper games. The key really is that Nintendo is trying to use something like Wii Sports to attract non-gamers by only forcing them to make a small abstraction, and they're trying to use this as a starting point. Once players have conquered the small abstraction, the "big" abstraction (which, on the Wii, is still not quite as big) is a lot smaller now, and much more conquerable.

deded999
05-28-2007, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
The Wii can never use all 11 of it's buttons,

I'm not sure why you say that?


but it doesn't need to given that both its nunchuck and wiimote are motion-sensitive and those add extra buttons without actually adding buttons.

... maybe - but I don't see what motion control adds to a FPS that say the Sixaxis doesn't, (ie. a motion-melee for instance), besides obviously using the pointer as a better Look. Think about it.


Anyway, Wii Tennis just focuses purely on timing. However, that is not to say that something like VT3 could not allow players to swing their Wiimote so as to achieve varying shots by how they swing (personally I'd prefer to just be able to swing the Wiimote and let physics go to work, but this is where the Wii's relatively low processing capacity comes to light and is one area where Nintendo should have thought a little more, but the Wii is admittedly a stepping stone and not the endpoint).

Agreed, although isn't that a valid criticism of the system?


If your mom is going, "DIE! DIE!" then apparently she was quite into the game and very much so enjoying herself- I'd definitely say that she would be a likely candidate to extend her preference into deeper games.

No, I think she just enjoyed the opportunity to virtually beat my face in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Believe me, despite her obvious enjoyment of the system, she won't be buying a Wii, or likely playing it again.


The key really is that Nintendo is trying to use something like Wii Sports to attract non-gamers by only forcing them to make a small abstraction, and they're trying to use this as a starting point. Once players have conquered the small abstraction, the "big" abstraction (which, on the Wii, is still not quite as big) is a lot smaller now, and much more conquerable.

Yes, that's true, and they must be lauded for the approach at least. It's the execution I have reservations about, but, as with the PS3, I suppose they should be given a chance to prove themselves before we (I!) get too critical...

Frd_Redlaw
05-29-2007, 05:32 AM
Just to play devils advocate (all three consoles have a place in my heart and my home) but I don't think wii has a complete monopoly on 'casual' gamers although it does very well for that. I've had most of my non-gamer family on eyetoy at some point not to mention guitar hero. And just yesterday my mum kicked me off my ps3 so she could play Flow.

Another interesting thing I've noticed is that the uber shinyness of ps3/360 will often entice people to sit and watch for a while (Oblivion and Motorstorm seem particularly adept at this)

BuddyFlashheart
05-29-2007, 08:33 AM
I have my doubts as to how successful of a platform the Wii will be in the long run, in terms of software support at least. That new audience Nintendo aims to capture doesn't strike me as one that is going to go into a store and go wild with new games purchases. But I don't mind the Wii thing, as long as it remains a separate branch. I don't want Waggle only to dominate the industry, nor do I want Sony to get any ideas from the hardware strategies of MS or Nintendo, or else I'll be playing the next-next-gen Naughty Dog and Insomniac games on hardware that is either cheap and weak or early, unreliable and lacking in features. For all the whining about the PS3 price, at least there is some justification to that price in terms of you getting what you pay for. The cost of entry is obviously a bit steep, but that will likely be easier to swallow once games like Uncharted and Haze here start rolling in.

TerranUp16
05-29-2007, 09:45 AM
I'm not sure why you say that?

No matter what way you hold the Wiimote, two buttons will always be reduced to menu buttons because they cannot be readily accessed. The Wiimote was designed to be held two ways- vertically as in Zelda and laterally as in Sonic, and the buttons are arranged to foment both lay-outs.


... maybe - but I don't see what motion control adds to a FPS that say the Sixaxis doesn't, (ie. a motion-melee for instance), besides obviously using the pointer as a better Look. Think about it.

Because of the nature of the nunchuck and how it's held, the nunchuck can be used more often in more varying ways. You can't shake the PS3 controller while trying to shoot. The nunchuck is a separate entity from the controller, and thus its motion use is not restricted to mere melee attacks. Theoretically, you could have a game with the nunchuck where you're yanking it left and right constantly to dodge incoming projectiles while you aim and fire simultaneously with the Wiimote.



Agreed, although isn't that a valid criticism of the system?

Yes, it is. The Wii is a great system, but it's not beyond rebuke.

PS- Isn't Guitar Hero coming to Wii? I'd heard a rumor, but admittedly haven't checked-up on it yet (I'm a rather big fan of metal, so...).

BuddyFlashheart
05-29-2007, 11:59 AM
I'm honestly more interested in the Splitfish controller for the PS3 than I will ever be about playing an FPS on Wii. There's an inherent issue with the Wii control method, in that it complicates the concept of rest zones. Ideally, in terms of in-game controls, the Wiimote would offer 1:1 controls. I mean, that's the only way that makes any sense. But then that's an issue because the reticule will move with any movement. With a KB+M set-up, you can simply lift your hand from the mouse and your aim will steady. With the Wiimote, how do you accomplish that without a bounding box system? Keep in mind that the only FPS I've played on Wii is Red Steel, and that game did little to alleviate my concerns.

The Splitfish controller seems to marry the mouse controls with motion sensing "nunchuk" controls, and that seems pretty ideal for first person games. The only problem there is balance; playing with one of those would probably give you an advantage over the competition, so that's probably out for MP.

deded999
05-29-2007, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by TerranUp16:
No matter what way you hold the Wiimote, two buttons will always be reduced to menu buttons because they cannot be readily accessed. The Wiimote was designed to be held two ways- vertically as in Zelda and laterally as in Sonic, and the buttons are arranged to foment both lay-outs.

Hm. That may be so, but considering that Metroid on the GC used eleven buttons and two analog sticks, (I'm counting the D-pad as four here, as that's how they end up being used), and Twilight Princess also uses eleven buttons, plus analog stick and pointer, I don't see how any non-simple 3D game can be played without using most of those buttons, (and of course some of them are used as menu buttons, but if the menu's are vital to the game, what difference does that make?). Which means that any game where you do much more than stand still and swing a stick, ie. a game where you move a character in a 3D world, will end up being pretty much as complex control-wise as the other consoles, negating the 'simplicity' of the controller.


Because of the nature of the nunchuck and how it's held, the nunchuck can be used more often in more varying ways. You can't shake the PS3 controller while trying to shoot. The nunchuck is a separate entity from the controller, and thus its motion use is not restricted to mere melee attacks.

Yes, I see what you're driving at, but I don't think that gives you that many more options in most situations...


Theoretically, you could have a game with the nunchuck where you're yanking it left and right constantly to dodge incoming projectiles while you aim and fire simultaneously with the Wiimote.

...isn't that exactly the same as strafing?


PS- Isn't Guitar Hero coming to Wii? I'd heard a rumor, but admittedly haven't checked-up on it yet (I'm a rather big fan of metal, so...).

No idea mate.

I think, to try to put my thoughts together more coherently, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I see the strengths of the Wiimote as being in the simpler games, where you do simple things like swing a bat, flip a pancake and swat a fly, (although not always that simple). For this it is perfect and absolutely the best controller out there. However, as the complexity of the game (and therefore the control system) increases, I see the abstraction of the controls increasing and the simplicity of the Wiimote control decreasing, until when you get to the level of FPS and RPGs, (in fact, in Zelda I ended up turning off the pointer controls because the stupid fairy 'cross-hair' was so distracting it played better aiming with the analog stick!), there isn't a big difference between the major controllers, bar a few nice little things that one can do better than the other.

If that's a correct assumption, then it may be that the games that most show off the strengths of the Wii end up being the simplest and - perhaps - the most limited in terms of gameplay, (not poor, not bad, but limited), while the more complex games don't show off the Wiimote to anywhere near the level the simpler games do.

Again, just my tuppence worth. I imagine a lot of these questions will be answered when Metroid (finally) turns up.

BuddyFlashheart
05-29-2007, 01:18 PM
For whoever might care, here is a review of the Splitfish FragFX controller(s) for the PS3. Makes me wish Sony would have had the balls to release an official peripheral like this one, as that'd probably help make it more commonplace.

http://www.twitchguru.com/2007/04/09/mouse_control_for_the_console/

deded999
05-29-2007, 01:21 PM
Dead link mate.

BuddyFlashheart
05-29-2007, 01:24 PM
Hmm, works on my end. Here's an IGN hands-on with the product, with basically the same information.

http://gear.ign.com/articles/769/769529p1.html

sanderDrost
05-29-2007, 01:37 PM
thats a gayass gear

buzzjive
05-29-2007, 01:39 PM
This thread is certainly off topic now.

Normally I'd avoid this type of thread here - but since there are some Free Radical eyes and ears here, I'm jumping in to the ring. The reason I'd avoid it is because all you can do here is argue opinions. The only fact right now is that the Wii is selling like gangbusters. Anything beyond that is opinion speculation. Who is buying it? What else will they buy? How long will it continue to sell? Nobody knows.

I've been gaming for roughly a quarter century now (wow), owning lots of systems and playing way too many games to even think about. Yet - somehow there's people that would consider me to not be a hardcore gamer simply because I haven't picked up a 360 or a PS3. I'm on a budget now for both time and money and don't see nearly enough value in either system today. And I wouldn't trade in my Wii for either of them - because it offers a very unique gaming experience (not to mention that my wife loves it, my 16 month old will be able to play it very soon, and I'm working on Wii software - heh).

The Wii is and will be my primary gaming system this generation from start to finish. On the other hand, I'm willing to pick up a secondary system - not because I need better graphics or more buttons or because there won't be enough entertainment on the Wii - but because there's developers whose games I want to play. If Free Radical, Bungie, Jeff Minter and The Behemoth didn't have 360 games coming out soon, I could continue to ignore the HD consoles. I wish they were all developing Wii games - but I'm willing to accept using ancient style controllers (lolz) to experience their visions.

So Free Radical - I'm willing to follow you with Haze (sadly waiting even longer for it to hit the system I'm breaking down to buy). Now - I expect some Wii love in return. And for crying out loud - the minigames genre is FULL (but I'll take what I can get).

BuddyFlashheart
05-29-2007, 01:54 PM
Heh. I don't think it has much to do with being a gamer or not, but I do admit I have a hard time grasping how anyone could be cool with missing out on Sony first party games for an entire generation, especially considering the platform these first parties have at their disposal this time around. I can understand the price being a serious road block at this point, but I can't wrap my head around the concept of missing out on Sony first party games.

deded999
05-29-2007, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by buzzjive:
Normally I'd avoid this type of thread here - but since there are some Free Radical eyes and ears here, I'm jumping in to the ring. The reason I'd avoid it is because all you can do here is argue opinions.

Sure, but at least it's a decent argument.


The only fact right now is that the Wii is selling like gangbusters. Anything beyond that is opinion speculation. Who is buying it? What else will they buy? How long will it continue to sell? Nobody knows.


Aha, but another fact exists - attachment rate. If only we knew it...

And of course no-one knows, but that doesn't mean we can't talk about it. I do think there's a big difference between this thread and the 'other' one, but again that's my opinion.


I've been gaming for roughly a quarter century now (wow), owning lots of systems and playing way too many games to even think about. Yet - somehow there's people that would consider me to not be a hardcore gamer simply because I haven't picked up a 360 or a PS3. I'm on a budget now for both time and money and don't see nearly enough value in either system today. And I wouldn't trade in my Wii for either of them - because it offers a very unique gaming experience (not to mention that my wife loves it, my 16 month old will be able to play it very soon, and I'm working on Wii software - heh).

Funnily enough, my wife has a DS, (I bought it), and has loved a few games on it such as Phoenix Wright, Hotel Dusk, Meteos, Nintendogs, (I bought em all), and played Wii Tennis a little bit. However, since getting the PS3, she has got into Rub a Dub and especially Sudoku in a big way. An isolated case of course, but maybe it's not the simplicity of the system or controller that matters, just the simplicity of the games - I believe the largest number of PC games are these kind of simple games too, and mostly played by women...


Originally posted by BuddyFlashheart:
Heh. I don't think it has much to do with being a gamer or not, but I do admit I have a hard time grasping how anyone could be cool with missing out on Sony first party games for an entire generation, especially considering the platform these first parties have at their disposal this time around. I can understand the price being a serious road block at this point, but I can't wrap my head around the concept of missing out on Sony first party games.

Yeah, me too - no disrespect intended though mate.

Oh and the Splitfish? I am disgusted to see that there's no left-handed option! It's just bloody handist that's what it is, blasted right-handed world, you're all against us, we have bigger brains, or something...

TerranUp16
05-29-2007, 02:34 PM
I believe the largest number of PC games are these kind of simple games too, and mostly played by women...

From what I've seen, those kinds of games are in the minority on the PC atm- but nonetheless the PC is a console with two sides. On one side, you have some of the darkest, deepest, and most viscious games ever created- and on the other you have educational and kids games as well as knock-offs of TV ****. That's not to say that consoles don't have these extremes either, but they generally also have a lot of games- or at least a lot more in the middle ground. If you take out the kids and TV games, I'd probably put money on that the PC has the highest percentage of M-rated games. Even many RTS games are now regularly attaining M-ratings (take, for example, the best strategy game ever created- Company of Heroes). I'm thinking that part of the reason for the flood of M-rated games on PC is b/c of the technology and the need to show it off and promote it- and M-rated games generally do this the best.

LiquidEagle
05-29-2007, 02:45 PM
Terran I think you forgot to mention the Sims, which is (or was, I'm not sure) a huge seller and is a big attraction for women gamers on PC.

sylonious
05-29-2007, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by BuddyFlashheart:
I have my doubts as to how successful of a platform the Wii will be in the long run, in terms of software support at least. That new audience Nintendo aims to capture doesn't strike me as one that is going to go into a store and go wild with new games purchases. But I don't mind the Wii thing, as long as it remains a separate branch. I don't want Waggle only to dominate the industry, nor do I want Sony to get any ideas from the hardware strategies of MS or Nintendo, or else I'll be playing the next-next-gen Naughty Dog and Insomniac games on hardware that is either cheap and weak or early, unreliable and lacking in features. For all the whining about the PS3 price, at least there is some justification to that price in terms of you getting what you pay for. The cost of entry is obviously a bit steep, but that will likely be easier to swallow once games like Uncharted and Haze here start rolling in.

I've always had a sweet spot for Tekken for some reason. I guess it reminds me of the good old days.

I definitely plan on getting back to Sony at some point. With Haze, Drake's Fortune, Rachet and Clank Future, Socom: Confrontation, MGS 4 and a possible Final Fantasy sequel possibly coming out this year the PS3 is starting to look like a much better option.

That Splitfish FragFX looks really good too. It definitely would give me an edge over most console players.

TerranUp16
05-30-2007, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by LiquidEagle:
Terran I think you forgot to mention the Sims, which is (or was, I'm not sure) a huge seller and is a big attraction for women gamers on PC.

Meh, like my sister. There are really only two Sims games- they just have ridiculous amounts of expansions. If you just take the two base games, I believe those have both been ported to the consoles- or will be.