Lumines to appear on PS3? Comments by Paul Loughrey

Unless it is feakishly amazing, it had better be downloadable and similarly priced to the 360 version.

I hope there will be a "PS3 Arcade" for this very reason - otherwsie we may see publishers publishing games for Live Arcade, and then thinking, "what the hey, let's release it on the PS3 at full price".

Sony has already announced a downloadable game service. The extents of the e-distribution service isn't known except that there will be downloadable games and downloadable content for games.

If they really wish to create something I think they should take on iTunes by selling music, videos and movies as well.

After all, there is a reason for the harddrive.

won't the "revamped" sony connect on ps3 do the iTunes thing?

as for lumines, what a game :D
i'm so happy about lumines2 on PSP, a ps3 game would be great, but only at the right price. like York said, hopefully it'll be on a PS3 Arcade style system, so it's cheap and cheerful!

Talk about milking a successful franchise - and quite fast at it too!
By December people might even get *gasp* fed up of Lumines, methinks.

REZ 2 on 360 PLEASE!!

oh joy 25GB of epilepsy :)

i think Sony is going to move to e-distribution with not just cheap arcade style games it would certainly converge all of their other divisions easily through one medium which be the PS3.

RRP £49.99 on Blu-Ray disc

Wow...£420 for 'real' next gen technology to play a game I can already play on the PSP

/Gets excited...

@ Mr Brown

Can't say I really see the point of your statement there. Just because Lumines doesn't conform to the stereotype of a next-gen game hardly seems a reason to criticise the PS3. It's not like Ninja Theory are suddenly going to think better of releasing Heavenly Sword just because a puzzle game is coming to the same console...

It's not like you have to buy it on PS3, especially if you're already content with playing it on PSP (or whatever other platforms it shows up on).

"Can't say I really see the point of your statement there."

It's called 'trolling'.

Rez on 360?

I am a 360 user and to be honest i would preffer a new Rez on the wii for obvious reasons.

Wow...£420 for 'real' next gen technology to play a game I can already play on the PSP

/Gets excited...

It will also b released on the 360 and i wouldnt be supprised if a pc & rev version where in the pipeline as well. Whats your point? All next gen machines that have fun little minigames suck?

Will I can understand that a game's developer wants as broad an audience for his games as possible (that and money, of course), this is not a happy thing for Sony.

The PSP has few original titles, and making them not exclusive to the handheld means less incentive to buy one for a customer. Which in turn makes for less incentive for a developer to produce original content for the PSP.

What the heck?

I think you'll see why it is so good if you play it on PSP. It's the perfect timewaster, just as good as Tetris which was the first huge portable title.

£10.80 for the Xbox 360 Xbox Live Arcade version (1200 points apparently) or £60 for the PS3 version. Hmmm, difficult choice! /LOL

£10.80 for the Xbox 360 Xbox Live Arcade version (1200 points apparently) or £60 for the PS3 version. Hmmm, difficult choice! /LOL

Hmmm, where did you see the price tag for the PS3 version? Who said it won't be downloadable?

"Can't say I really see the point of your statement there. Just because Lumines doesn't conform to the stereotype of a next-gen game hardly seems a reason to criticise the PS3. It's not like Ninja Theory are suddenly going to think better of releasing Heavenly Sword just because a puzzle game is coming to the same console... "

True enough, but in a way it does. Whatsthe point of releasing it on the PS3 when most people who are probably going to get a PS3 already own a PSP? I don't intetend to buy a PS3 and hearing that Lumines could be coming to the PS3 doesn't do anything to change my opinion. Its a waste of time IMO. My statement is based on the fact that your paying all that money for all this new technology and in my opinion there aren't enough games to back that amount of spending.

Is that trolling? Maybe, I don't care. £420 is alot of money in my eyes and MGS4 sometime next year isn't enough. Fact.

£425 for a PS3.

or

£279.99 XBox 360 Premium
+
£12.99 Official XBox 360 Play & Charge Kit
+
£54.99 Official XBox 360 Wireless Adaptor
+
£34.99 XBox Live 12 Month Gold Membership Card
+
£129.99 Xbox 360 HD DVD USB drive (Retail sources have revealed that the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on will retail for under £130)
=
£512.95


I am assuming you will want to watch High Definition movies and play games on the Internet with your Cool Hip New Next Generation Games Console and I also expect that you have worked to remove network cables from your living room.

I'm just guessing here but you probably bought a £1000+ HDTV to go along with your new Next Generation Games Console. Maybe your Mrs want to use it for more than just watching you play games? Maybe your Mrs has better taste than you and dont care for the Call to Duty or the Advanced Warfighting? Maybe she looks forward to Singstar and being able to download and sing in any song?

She might be lazy lying in the sofa watching some TV and then tries the console out but she's fed up by Singstar and wants some quick puzzling action that she can do on the TV? A couple of bucks for Lumines? Doesnt sound bad. Then she steals the machine from you and sits there watching the blocks fall in sync with the music for hours and hours driving your neighbours mad as she's turned the volume up on the digital surround system that's connected to the console. In days she will start eating mushrooms and dancing with strange men in dark neon-lit underground rave clubs.


No but really what is the point of all this bickering?

Xbox 360 fans dont want to feel bad about their purchase, anything good for the PS3 can only be bad for the Xbox 360 right? No, dont be so insecure.

PS3 fans want the features of the Xbox and Xbox Live without having to buy an XBox 360, Lumines is a good game so why not? Yes of course, need more games though. Need some Geometry Wars, some Uno and some Bankshot Billiards.


Pricing is an issue with the downloadable services, they are going to have to experiment and try different pricing methods. The crazy pricing of some of the Oblivion addons is probably unwanted, the pricing already set by Xbox Live for the arcade games is probably more likely.

But please, dont be afraid, just embrace the PS3. It's not terribly expensive, it's just got a lot of features you might not want to use from the start. But all those features makes it just a little bit more exciting, just a little bit easier to convince yourself that you need one.

So come on. I'm sure you will all have turned around in half a year.

£425 for a PS3.

or

£279.99 XBox 360 Premium
+
£12.99 Official XBox 360 Play & Charge Kit
+
£54.99 Official XBox 360 Wireless Adaptor
+
£34.99 XBox Live 12 Month Gold Membership Card
+
£129.99 Xbox 360 HD DVD USB drive (Retail sources have revealed that the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on will retail for under £130)
=
£512.95


screw that < £200 for a wii and i'm happy! i always preffered meteos anyway!

To be fair, "it is said" that the XBox+HD-DVD will cost less than the PS3, and how much a Live Gold subscription costs is irrelevant, as we don't know how much Sony will be charging, or worse, how much every developer will be charging.

Sony has said some things in that regard, but what they said in the past were lies, so why trust them this time. We just have to wait and see.

BOTH PS3 and XBox are terribly expensive, and the PS3 is for all the wrong reasons. I don't want a BluRay player in my games console. Not even if (and that's a big if) BluRay should win the format war with HD-DVD, because along the live of the PS3 I will buy a way better player, as I have done mutliple times with DVD players and the PS2. Then I will be stuck again with unneeded functionality that I didn't want in the first place. At least MS gives me the choice (and I will say "no", for the reasons just stated).

The basic deathmatch, matchmaking, messaging service will indeed be free. Additional content will cost money and that is what makes Sonys approach so darn good and it is weird that people cant believe that.

Sony wants their platform there for free usage by anyone, that means they have a much bigger userbase that will be introduced to their content and their multiplayer gaming. MEANING more cash for Sony. Which is all they want.

However MMORPG developers will probably charge money but I'm quite sure developers will not charge for standard multiplayer action. After all, it is you who are running the server when starting a game, it's not EA or UBISOFT. They are all peer 2 peer or client server games. Nothing magical there and don't tell me Microsoft is running 40k Halo 2 servers, they are doing it exactly the same way on Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2 and PC. Which is why having to pay money for their GOLD service is LUDICROUS.

Big words, I'm annoyed. Not at you, but at the way Microsoft can do these things and noone will notice. Heck Nintendo can do it as well and noone cares. Pay 5-10 bucks to play SNES Mario World again.

Disc, you are so right. Why do people keep thinking that the PS3's online service is too good to be true?

The basic deathmatch, matchmaking, messaging service will indeed be free. Additional content will cost money and that is what makes Sonys approach so darn good and it is weird that people cant believe that.

disc, can you give us a link that confirms this?

I agree with most of your post, but Sony has not confirmed any important details of their online service yet, AFAIK.

Sony wants

You should stop pretending to know what Sony wants for your own sake. You do not, I do not, sometimes I have the feeling even Sony does not know what Sony wants. In the end you might be disappointed.

It's what comes out in the end, not what Sony says what one day will be. Have they been particularly honest? Have they shown even one thing that matched the hype? No, sadly.

I think I can safely say that you are a Sony man, and there is nothing wrong with that, but you lack arguments, facts and confidence. Just let it rest, wait and see like the rest of us.

Source for downloadable games : E-Distribution Initiative.

Ken Kutaragi interview with PC Impress Watch, translated at Gamespot.

Regarding the business aspect of the PS3's online components, Sony seems to be taking its cues from the PC. "You can't charge money for network matching and other basic services. These things are just taken for granted on the PC...On the PS3, basic services will be taken for granted while content will be the bread and butter of our business."

But sure dont believe him, he does hype things to a disturbing degree. In that interview people seem to focus more on that he said optical media and even harddrives will disappear in the future. Far away in the future though, I sure know I wouldnt want to rely on a network connection for my code but still I make sure to run a version control system on the network to store my code safely.

The only really odd thing in that interview was how he wanted the servers for Gran Turismo to be thousands and thousands of Cells. Quite a crazy idea since there are much cheaper and better solutions for SERVER usage. The Cell is a numbermachine.

What SONY REALLY wants. Please understand how important that is. They are thinking iTunes, not Xbox Live Arcade. For Games.


And heh, dont trust me. I'm an EVIL EVIL man.

Re: disc's figures breakdown.

Don't forget to factor in HDDs here as well. 60gb on PS3, 20gb on 360. I know bigger 360 drives are on the way, but given that the 20gb drive costs 70 quid, how much are they likely to be?

Whether disc is a Sony man or not, he's presented resonable, structured arguments on this thread. (If only there were more like that!)

Sony have said on numerous occasions that playing games online will be free (in so much as you will not have to pay a subscription to Sony). MMOs will of course have their own charges, and I agree with disc that it would be almost unimaginable that publishers will think they can charge £50-£60 for a game (say an FPS), and then charge you to play it online. And this is based on an industry model where not all games are peer-to-peer/client server (the one thing I wanted to pick you up on disc - sorry). EA runs servers for Battlefield 2:Modern Combat on PS2, Xbox and Xbox360, and yet doesn't charge users to play on them. And I'm sure there are other examples of this as well.

@Mr Brown
I don't think there are ever enough games at a console launch that justify the cost of buying a new piece of hardware. I think the Nintendo Revolution (for I refuse to adopt the new name...) will be an exception, but not because I'm desperate to play the games straight away or because it has a new control interface, but because the console will be priced low enough for me to not feel ripped off if the games don't blow me away.

Also I don't think we can assume that the majority of people who buy a PS3 already own a PSP. However, they may be as likely to own a 360, so if it's released on that then they may already be playing it on there. Sony are hardly likely to push this as a generation defining game. It will most likely be downloadable, simply because of the type of game it is, and the amount of disc space it will require. (I imagine downloaded music tracks are likely to take up more space than the game code itself.)

And of course all of this ignores the most basic fact - it's your choice. Buy it or not, there will inevitably be plenty of people who like the idea of being able to play this on their PS3. If it's not for you, then that's your choice. But it's release is hardly a damnation of the platform, regardless of the consoles cost.

Even having Lumines downloadable may still undermine the PSP product.

I know the PSP has the benefit of high quality portability, but still, it's hardly a great advert for the PSP if we're charged high for a game that is an impulse purchase on other consoles.

Why the fuck is everyone harking at it being on Blu Ray just because it's on PlayStation 3.
Assuming there won't be more than 9Gb of data, DVD would almost certainly be the logical format. And none of us here know the actual manufacturing costs of games on Blu Ray anyway. It's not like all the first PlayStation 2 games were on DVD, a fair few stuck to CD from the start, until they all migrated to DVD when they all needed the space.

/searches comments thread for mentions of blu-ray

/shrug

BOTH PS3 and XBox are terribly expensive, and the PS3 is for all the wrong reasons. I don't want a BluRay player in my games console. Not even if (and that's a big if) BluRay should win the format war with HD-DVD

I feel like shooting everyone who blames the Blu-ray drive the high price of the PS3...
And Blu-ray can be used for games you know.

Here's a fact A year ago the Hard Drive wasn't even mentioned in the tech specs only the 2.5" Hard Drive Bay.

The Hard Drive in particular is very hard to supply, and even harder on Sony because of the fact that the hard Drive doesn't go down in cost hence why MS lost as much as it did on the Xbox, and they've got to supply an estimated 100 million of those in 5 years.

The Xbox 360 has neither hence why it's blooming $300 difference between Core Xbox 360 and Premium PS3.

@tony

I seem to remember that Sony have said all disc-based games will be released on Blu-Ray. I don't know what their thinking is, and I can imagine publishers would want to use DVD-9 if they can, but Sony seem to think that all games will be on Blu-Ray.

Blu-ray offers far better copy protection than DVD-9 and HD-DVD (as they use the same tech). That's why it has more backing, mostly.

I know the PSP has the benefit of high quality portability, but still, it's hardly a great advert for the PSP if we're charged high for a game that is an impulse purchase on other consoles.

it's easily justifyable buying Lumines for a full price game on the PSP, because on the consoles Q Entertainment is doing exactly what i feared companies would eventually do with games and microtransactions.

What's going to happen is that they sell the "Core" pack on XBL for very little and then charge you extra for not just skins, but for the rest of the game like multi-player modes etc.

I read the damned article on it somewhere i can't seem to find it again so frustrating. :(

It's why Mizuguchi.has always reffered to the initial Lumines on the XBL as "Basic".

@ jedi Blu-ray offers far better copy protection than DVD-9 and HD-DVD (as they use the same tech). That's why it has more backing, mostly.

That makes sense. Blu Rays copy protection will mean developers will want to use it as their chosen media - but lets not jump to conclusions with pricing for games such as Lumines.

Though - Blu Ray and HD-DVD, don't use the 'same' tech do they?
Both have entirely different specs, and to my knowledge the encryption on Blu Ray is totally different to that on HD-DVD - apart from their similarities as a great hi capactity HD film storage medium - you can't say they're 'the same'.

Blu Ray and HD-DVD, don't use the 'same' tech do they?

He was referring to HD-DVD and DVD9. At least, that's how I read it.

heh.

Oh dear... I really should read more.

Apologies.

/wipes sleep from eyes

heh.

Oh dear... I really should read more.

Apologies.

/wipes sleep from eyes

HD-DVD and DVD9 don't use the same tech though Blu-ray and HD-DVD both use Blu-lasers... (damn it, i meant Blue lasers)

Can't remember what it is that makes HD-DVD compatible with DVD9 though i think it's something to do with the thickness of which the disc reads it or something.

Blu-ray is more secure and is updateable as well Devs and Hollywood alike would LOVE Blu-ray.

Both Blu-ray & HD-DVD use a blue laser which has a shorter wavelength compared to red lasers. About 405 nm compared to 650nm.

Blu-ray in conjunction with a wider aperture for more accurate focusing of the laser light helps to increase the amount of data that can be stored on a disc.



The Blu-ray disc is different to a normal DVD. DVD & HD-DVD use a 0.6mm layer of clear polymer over the substrate, Blu-ray on the other hand uses only a 0.1mm layer.

This much thinner Blu-ray layer means the laser light is not so diffused which means in turn a higher numeric aperture, smaller pit length & smaller track pitch so that more data can easily be stored on a Blu-ray disc.

I'm sure there's a bigger difference than that, that doesn't ecplain the better copy protection.

That's straight down to Sony's security measures to protect their own media.

I believe they're going to use the same philosohpy as they try to secure the PSP.

Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray use AACS, short for Advanced Access Content System.

The only difference being that Blu Ray is adding another two supplementary security elements: ROM Mark and BD+.

ROM Mark is a sort of stamp, invisible to the consumer, which can be embedded using special equipment available only to licensed Blu-Ray disc producers. Obviously, these discs will only be compatible with Blu-ray equipments.


BD+ is a dynamic encryption scheme that allows for changing encryption schemes midstream. Should the encryption be cracked, the BDA (Blu-Ray Disc Association ) can update the encryption scheme and put it on all new discs, thus preventing a single crack from opening up the entire BD spec for the duration of its lifetime. The lack of a dynamic encryption model is what made DeCSS so disastrous in the industry's eyes: once CSS was cracked, all DVDs from then on were crackable.

HD-DVD went for something simpler and decided to use just AACS for the content’s protection.