MeBrains Comments

Page 2 of 34

  • Sony boss talks of "sleepless nights" when trying to balance PS4 capabilities and price

  • MeBrains 09/07/2014

    @DozyKipper
    Interestingly, if Sony had gone with 4GB and Microsoft with 8GB, I don't think Microsoft would have had to change a thing - they'd still be at the higher price, with Kinect and have all the digital DRM. People would have just put up with it because it was the more powerful device. (At least I think so.)
    In the eyes of most customers that would probably have been correct. "Hey. It's got double the RAM. It's better!"

    But that would not be taking into account the type of ram and Xbone's awkward system design (referring to the eSRAM and things).

    At this moment, I believe Sony allows just under 5Gb to be used by Devs. MS as well.

    So, I do not think, given the other differences in HW, that MS's console would outshine Sony's, even should the latter have only half the RAM.
    Reply +2
  • MeBrains 09/07/2014

    @Dizzy
    Well thanx to a healthy competitive console market, they went for the best they could afford. Good for us consumers.
    thanks to a "healthy competitive console market" and dumb customers, they also got rid of high-tech, hardware innovations like Cell was and are we presented without the host of groundbreaking and out-of-the-box technologies like BR, HDMI, BT, WiFi were all these years ago.

    Seriously, I am increasingly thinking: competition is not good for the games business. The sole reason being that (some) customers are just blind to reason.
    Reply -2
  • How strong exactly is PlayStation's 2014 line-up?

  • MeBrains 09/07/2014

    yes... so the exclusive line-up this year is a bit poor indeed.

    just like the early PS3 days then. Still. That last-gen's console got a whole lot of absolutely fantastic titles later on.

    So: it's not a sprint here. No need to forsake quantity for quality.
    Reply +4
  • Shuhei Yoshida pays tribute to Phil Spencer

  • MeBrains 03/07/2014

    @avluis we both seem to agree here chapski. ;) Reply 0
  • MeBrains 02/07/2014

    "Competition really pushes everyone, Microsoft and us, to do better," Yoshida concludes. "I think in the end the consumers will win."
    competition and consumer stupidity killed off innovations like Cell and custom silicon in general, as well as the broad package of brand-new technologies Sony offered in the PS3 era.

    but I understand what he is saying... :)
    Reply 0
  • How to use a DualShock 4 wirelessly with a PS3

  • MeBrains 02/07/2014

    sweet... I have one PS3 DS on its way to the high heavens. I can immediately buy one of these new thingies to replace it in due time.

    good stuff actually.
    Reply +2
  • Transformers: Rise of the Dark Spark review

  • MeBrains 30/06/2014

    hey, is this the rebranded Rise of the Robots?

    :|
    Reply 0
  • Google reveals Cardboard, the company's inexpensive take on VR

  • MeBrains 26/06/2014

    lol. I quite like it, but it does sound like april fools.

    hope I can get my son to build one! :D
    Reply 0
  • Batman: Arkham Knight's PS4-exclusive Scarecrow Nightmare Pack detailed

  • MeBrains 25/06/2014

    @TheNinjaWarriorAGAIN thanks for the nice write-up. that's a good recapitulation. I was more referring to recent consoles, ever since Xbox launched. Reply 0
  • MeBrains 24/06/2014

    @TheNinjaWarriorAGAIN which games are you talking about then?

    Also it's launch date parity, not any other parity.
    Personally, I am not too sure. Parity means the "state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay". The word itself has more to do with your latter connotation, than with your former, dunnit?
    Reply +2
  • MeBrains 24/06/2014

    @makeamazing
    Well the problem was that MS set the major precedent last gen
    indeed it did. with complete console exclusive games, instead of a meagre, simple DLC.

    some people seem to forget which of the two console manufacturers has always gone as far as demanding platform parity or buying into full (non DLC) game platform exclusivity.
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 24/06/2014

    @jetsetwillie
    sony seems to be worse than M$ these days with this exclusive DLC shit.
    your impression seems wrong to me. Sony doesn't or hardly doesn't (we have Destiny for Japan recently) complete platform exclusives, which is something MS invests in. MS also has this "parity clause" crippling Indies in the first place, as well as potentially leading to sub-optimisations on the competing platform.

    But you probably don't agree with me. I think of GTA, MGS, and some FF'ies as 3rd party PS platform exclusives. The latter two are Japanese and the devs probably had no interest in releasing for MS initially. They do now do. Do you have more, non-first party of course?
    Reply -7
  • The Witcher 3's next-gen wolf fur in action

  • MeBrains 24/06/2014

    well... I thought back in the day the first Tomb Raider having realistic physics and I thoroughly enjoyed the game. Guess I was still naive then, as this tech, although nice, changes everything!

    :|
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 24/06/2014

    I bought an 280X - also because I like supporting the underdog.

    With the amount of playing I do (which is not a lot anymore), it is more than adequate enough, although a damn shame that it is last-gen tech repackaged.

    Couldn't care less about hairs!
    Reply -3
  • MSI Nightblade review

  • MeBrains 22/06/2014

    just built a 1200 PC with better specs than this one, only my mobo appears to be last gen - bought it as I didn't know better.

    the rest is i7-4770, 280X 3Gb, 16Gb Ram, 256SSD, 750W modular PSU (I know) and the lovely Antec ISK-600 case.
    Reply +2
  • Why Unreal deserves to be remembered alongside Half-Life

  • MeBrains 22/06/2014

    I never understood why there was no Unreal 2 - single player either. It was a damn good game... Reply +1
  • Editor's blog: I am sexist

  • MeBrains 21/06/2014

    Tom, you got to 900 comments, which kind of by itself proves that it was a good article to write.

    Now, all I read was "blahblah-blahblah" and then some. You are 30, I am older. Both sexes do exist and both are different. A different upbringing, a different view on the sexes, a different look at sexism. I have the impression that society, for some reason which I am not able to explain, is zooming in on a man's sexism towards women, as if it automatically would leak to denigration, abuse and more. Sexism from women to man is just not spoken off.

    Sexism doesn't automatically lead to abuse though. It's always been like that - men chase, women select. Men use whatever in their arsenal to "literally" down them, women still only select. Women like the use of that arsenal, until men get uncivilized that is. I once had a female colleague whom I though was working against what I was trying to achieve professionally chatting up to me, I asked her to leave. Her answer, honestly worded and in jest explained while brought to great support of both men and women colleagues around as well as to me, summed it up quite nicely: "You are a man; you are supposed to attract women, not scare them away!" Although we had a good laugh about it, she was right and, given the female coworkers' reaction, they all expected so. Men are expected to act differently towards women; in case we do not, we have another problem with the most valuable of sexes even more.

    We might not be "superior" (in fact, maybe indeed we aren't), but both sexes still expect us to act sexist. Is that acting sexism then?


    lol... a socio-cultural discourse on EG! :D
    Reply 0
  • Tech Analysis: Sunset Overdrive at E3 2014

  • MeBrains 20/06/2014

    @azun
    The visual fidelity they can produce, is not a significant difference.
    well... what is "significant" huh?

    last gen "significant" was 2-3 fps difference on almost the same resolution for some.

    this gen to these same persons, "insignificant" is a difference between 900p vs 1080p, and 25 frames vs 40 respectively.

    yea
    Reply +3
  • MeBrains 19/06/2014

    @cloudskipa
    OMG, we've been through this before! Could you please detach yourself from my nutsack?
    hey, but you seem to flip-flop even more inconsistently than a famous Redmond console manufacturer.

    just saying...


    Remember State of Decay? Remember how it ran at about 15-25fps? Exactly.
    err. no. apart from never really having an interest in zombie fpshmups, but... was it on PS3 for you to make the 15-25fps reference? I really am at loss to why you ask...
    Reply +3
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @cloudskipa lol... i do strongly have the impression you were of a completely different opinion only a year ago.

    * feels the need to look up the TLoU review *
    Reply +16
  • How the Xbox One GPU Kinect reserve unlock works

  • MeBrains 19/06/2014

    @frazzl


    1) a survey can very well be if it does not have a statistically sound representation of the target group. I mean, I can survey myself and report that 100% of respondents thinks your argument is based on thin air. Would you accept that?

    4) The 0.5% figure was based on the numbers reported by a consumer magazine (12.500 units) which ran a report based on 155 letters and which was subsequently compared to Sony's (who else's?) sell-through numbers (2.500.000). Is that spin, or just simple maths? (note that the amount of defective units came from the program, not Sony)

    edit: damn... forgot the good mood sign, I still am in genuinly: :D ;)
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @frazzl
    1) Not just one repair company but the Game Informer survey as well. That's not anecdotal evidence, sorry.
    what is one repair company and an internet survey worth then?

    ok... less anecdotal:
    3% failure rate for PS3: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/02/xbox-360-failure-rates-worse-than-most-consumer-electornics/

    anecdotally: written by a journo who's known to have been quite supportive of xbox btw

    or 0,5%: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8263063.stm

    even taking into account the BBC's own quite ridiculous Watchdog report about the subject!

    compared to how much for 360 from the sites you linked to - an anecdotical 100%? You had three for crying out loud! ;)
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @frazzl frazzl, me main man down south. let's talk here. man to man.

    1) I am, as I have not seen evidence of the contrary. You base your claim on one report of a repair company.

    2) I'd rather take the rumoured, like I so said as well, 1% over the 10% coming from one repair company.

    3) As evidence it is meaningless. Anecdotally it may be meaningful. Do think about my question. No need for replies.

    4) This I know; we don't need to discuss.

    5) Sony said something like "to avoid long, expensive court procedures". But twist it around: should the plaintiff's advocates have a genuine case, would they indeed have settled with 1) a free game out of a list of Sony choice for a console on its way out and 2) free repairs or refunds of repairs, provided the model is correct and the defect has been proven to be as filed against? If these advocates had a multi-million claim to fight for, would they accept a $70 worth win?! Accepting that sounds equally deluded.

    6) In the states they notoriously take everybody to court for the smallest of things, or are we going to discuss that as well? What's still surprising me, is that MS didn't get one.

    7) no need to say so. You use anecdotal evidence - that very same article - I do as well.
    Reply +2
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @frazzl
    Actually the reported YLOD failure rates have been much higher than that:

    Joystiq lists it at 10% in 2009.

    An Australian hardware repair company lists it at between 10- 15% based on their repair history.
    your first link also mentions that the 54.2% figure for 360 "sounds awfully low" and that it could "have been a bone-chilling 100 percent."

    From your second link you take over the repair company's 10%, but disregard the other figure being mentioned. Failure rate were rumoured that "only 1% of PS3 consoles experience the YLOD".


    Now based on your own experience: how many persons you have come across saying "I had RROD" vs "I had YLOD". To me, the former, most everybody. The latter...


    You are also conveniently ignoring the disc read errors the PS2 suffered from. Sony were successfully sued by consumers in the US. The fact that a class action lawsuit was successful should be an indication that the incidence was not trivial!
    glad you pointed that out. Actually looked up some things. Got a few did-you-knows about it (opened my eyes):
    - did you know, it was filed by only three individuals?
    - did you know, it was settled, not won (you did mean "settled" when you mentioned "successful")?
    - did you know, that this settlement conisted of Sony having to pay a game and repairs for who had ran into the problem?

    Given the settlement, I have the impression the plaintiffs just did not see any chance to win this and agreed to a game, not to the millions they'd never get.

    I'm sorry chapski, but can you explain how a 100% (not my number, but one you linked to above) defective, disc scratching console gets no class action lawsuit?



    pfffrrrttt - i do start to sound like a "fanboy" these days... :S
    Reply +2
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @cloudskipa
    Since the 360 (Xenon) and PS3 (Cell) both use the same PPC codebase we've been told time and time again there is nothing particularly difficult about developing for the Cell CPU.
    hey you are correct. MS did pay for the same PPC codebase developed by STI!

    hey you are wrong: most problems of getting things to run well on Cell (ok. ps3 as a whole, but I just couldn't give up the rhyme), was because of Cells peculiarities. Remember how you only could get the most of it by scheduling your in-Cell PPC-to-PPU data transmissions either clockwise or counterclockwise?

    PS3 was not that ill-designed. It was fantastically designed! Look at what it was able to do... ever since the first Uncharted and in good hands.

    It just was that Cell was not really a very good match for games and you'd need to tweak your engine a friggen lot to make the most of it. Time which most 3rd parties or most engine developers just would not take.
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    Behave son. You're so pro Sony you can't see for all the shit in your eyes that's coming out your mouth.
    lol! :D

    cute. did I mention I am pro-sony? (for reasons I can well-explain)

    :rolleyes:


    Microsoft got what they deserved, and I've criticised them to the n'th degree for it,
    here's where we differ. I do not think they quite got the appropriate reaction to such a scandalous piece of hardware. Yes, it had great online. Yes, it had great exclusives. Yes, both mentioned absolutely still need working hardware! You can't watch the world cup on a tv which is broken, so to say.


    but Sony was equally disgraceful in terms of their attitude towards customers, but they never got punished for it, because the law wasn't against them at those failure rates.
    they did react to the battery problem, taking all blame on them, recalling all batteries. For a 0.00002% failure rate! (and Sony is one of the top laptop battery suppliers still!)

    They had the DRM - they took the blame. They had the PSN hack - they literally, apart from offering to the customers, bowed their head in shame, which still is one of the strongest signals a Japanese can give. Disgraceful? Yea. I do recognize MS doing these things.


    Sony, who carried on happily ignoring YLOD failures in most cases.
    Ignoring YLOD? I think the standard warranty covered it, no? With failures within the acceptable 2-3% why would they have to do anything? Or do you have higher numbers? Or are you going to bring on that BBC show about it where there's four persons standing in front of the Sony Repair Shop van?


    They were arrogant. Thought all the developers would have to adapt to their unique hardware design, as they'd been dominant in last gen
    That was not arrogant; that was the way it was done up until MS killed innovation (lol - really). All consoles (are there exceptions?) just had custom silicon up until MS single-handily gave HW innovation the head shot! (lolol)


    Look, we can whack the mole back and forth for aeons on end. let's wait for a few weeks until another topic pops up and start over again, good idea?

    :)

    ps: no hard feelings.
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    They didn't get away with it easily really did they? Cost them fortune.
    Indeed... well deserved too: it's all of their own doing - or did somebody have a gun at their faces when they had their "go / nogo" meeting?

    edit: as a customer though, this 1 billion worth of knowledge does not make me all warm towards MS. I see it as bog standard +1 year support for a machine I just want to see working. Or do we accept the same kind of practice for all consumer hardware now? TV's breaking every few months, computer components one by one, mobiles having to be sent back every few weeks? And then say: "oh. it's okay, because I have more warranty now!"

    I keep saying: they got away with it very very easy. They even had more sales because of it! Go figure!



    It was the sad fact that Sony fecked up so royally with ps3 launch and SDK,tools etc that MS were able to get away with it really. The alternative was just not strong enough to tempt people away at that point
    it was the fact that the (mostly american part of the) internet was so against Sony following their battery problem, their DRM scandal and what not, as well as the Killzone 2 hype (why was that? it had been done for ages and it still is now - you have seen the Halo 5 footage released last week?) and their very steep yet fair price, coupled with the Halo and GoW buzzz at the time which necked Sony.

    Back then - and they learned lessons during last gen and are more open about now - they did make one capital mistake towards developers. Something all manufacturers before always had done and something MS had not even need to think about given their generic hardware in both their gens. That is, back then, they did not inform 3rd parties about best practices, as it was seen as propriety information.

    Based on this lesson learned Cerny opted for an easier architecture and better and well documented SDKs.
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Playstationman well then. a billion thrown around during an investor's call.

    warranties are budgeted. Each company has a budget for DOA products. The fact that here it is a 1 billion budget, is entirely MS's own fault launching a machine unfit for purpose. Yet the community has started using the number as something which we should appreciate MS for, taking pride in MS's reaction, while it is just bog standard - but expensive for the company.

    it also is difficult knowing how it was split up and even more so how much they recouped by subsequent "just in case one breaks" sales.

    anyhows. to me fact still is: they launched a scandalously ill-made machine and got away with it easily.
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @deesmith
    This is so much like the PS3 last gen where the devs just did not have the proper tools to make the system sing. Microsoft has worked hard and has a roadmap to continue to make the system batter and more efficient. You add this and the eventual addition of DX12 plus more games using the dedicated servers and we will be closer to seeing the full potential of the system.
    it is not at all like last gen, is it?

    Last gen you had two very different architectures. One easy, based on retail components; one difficult, based on custom silicon.

    One was easy to tap; the other very difficult. Kutaragi-san notoriously mentioned something like "let the devs sweat a bit" and they had to to get the most out of the platform.

    This gen: architectures are very similar with PS4 having both faster RAM, as well as a better GPU - which has some custom silicon still (is that used yet?). the tweaks you mention will be provided by both MS and Sony.

    Wait for the full potential indeed. For both consoles.

    It's going to be interesting up to a certain extent. It won't be if you think MS will magically bridge the gap.
    Reply +2
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Playstationman
    It cost $1.05 - $1.15bn to repair consoles and fix the ones in stock.
    like said - disregarding the apparent increased sales by fanboys (I must use that word here) actually buying more than one console "just in case one breaks" - the number is so friggen high, I increasingly doubt it the more I read it.

    I know that it is the number having been slung around, but where does it come from and what is it based on?
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    Cost them best part of $4billion in warranties and repairs.
    ooh... 4 billion?! that's another four times more than the absurd number I had in mind. Do we have any idea where that came from and what is was based on? Because, by just extending warranties, that seems like mighty much. For $4 billion, you can have a completely new CPU R&D'd, a plant built and the CPU's produced... That's the tune of some billions talking.
    Reply +3
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    How's it for us gamers, if the developers cant utilise it properly, and doesnt fit real world game developer requirements??
    OK. There's two sides to this: HW and SW.

    HW wise, Sony's investment in Cell was, in all regards, an investment they made because Sony thought the processor would benefit PlayStation. They invested in it for us gamers.

    SW wise, much like almost all consoles coming before PS3 (exception being MS's consoles) all had custom, hence difficult to code for silicon.


    Also the irony of your comment after ps4 is about as generic a hardware design as a console has ever been.
    indeed and I must be one of the only ones here finding that a damn damn shame. They should have used Cell v2 for it. I like innovation you see?

    But yea. I understand their choice for going generic here and only improving where they could: DDR5 - our own RL said it was unheard of and custom tweaks to the GPU they bought, which I wonder of, are these used yet?


    I never really bothered about frame rate. My idea was: "is the game good?". Never bother about playing the uncharteds, the tlou at sub-30fps. They were damn fine games! MS's fans were quite proud for it, and hey, they turned around now all of a sudden.

    Look, after MS's most scandalous launch of HW in consumer history (57.2% faulty?! Really?) and seeing how they got away with it supported by a macho, gung-ho culture, as well as the company's inability to actually create something new for all these years, made me quite the MS opponent in the console space.

    But they did Live well! At least this they did improve on!
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    Not by end it didnt, which is what i was talking about. They were also charging hugely more for initial hardware (free online doesnt count as a hardware feature btw lol)

    it simply had blu ray player by end.
    and an HDD, which "justifies" the price difference between the latter days of 360 and PS3 then, doens't it?


    still had slit ram architecture and an inferior gpu
    yeeep... but a faster, though exotic CPU! Completely custom built for us gamers too. Like all other previous consoles - all working on custom silicon. MS was the first to step in with bog standard components. Good riddance, HW innovation!


    Sorry mate, but it was in many ways inferior hardware, whichever way you look at it. If sony designed it in way developers couldnt get best out of it, that's bad hardware, if it's cause the components themselves didnt suit game developers needs, that's bad hardware.
    what are you trying to prove here? Developers could clearly get the best out of it? What is your point?

    To me bad hardware is hardware totally unsuited for purpose, like when it breaks a lot. That's bad hardware, no? PS4 did deliver the games and didn't break: good hardware, no? Difficult to untap (like most all consoles in the past), but good hardware.
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @jabberwoky lol... well observed I guess! :) Reply +1
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Suarez07
    You could argue that Sony charged MORE for inferior hardware with ps3. (yes, yes, linear exclusives looked great, but for vast majority of games, and for all intensive purposes, it was inferior in 90%of games)
    I don't normally up- or downvote posts in a discussion I am in, but I did yours this time, as you should know better...

    Like Darkwaknight said: PS3 had BR, BT, WiFi, an HDD, the mightily expensive Cell (I know, I know), Memory Card Readers, HDMi, free online and full backwards compatibility (in its initial version). So, Sony was charging a lot more, but also gave quite a lot more out of the box.

    (let's forget the discussion that, through Live, an Xbox customer actually ended up paying more for his console, ok?)

    On top of that, when well used, the hardware was not in fact inferior to 360, but few multiplats took, understandably so, the amount of time necessary to indeed use the exotic hardware well.


    Here, both machines are of such similar make, that is it clear to see which offers the best hardware: PS4, mostly through its more expensive DDR5, and its GPU upgrade. Still, MS, arrogantly so, charges as much.
    Reply +13
  • DriveClub could be the racing game to beat this year

  • MeBrains 19/06/2014

    @frazzl
    Hated V-Rally but really loved the Colin McRae titles.
    for me it was quite the other way around. loved V-Rally, but never got into the McRae games.

    V-Rally with the absolutely fantastic NegCon controller was a blast. I recently looked up if it I could hook it up to PS3 with some adapter. Unfortunately, that seems to be a no-no. That controller was really well made for all things racing and V-Rally became an absolutely arcade thrill ride with it.
    Reply 0
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @Playstationman hey but he did post with this winky eye thingy this time. Reply +4
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @Cassive err... yea... except that you Brits sometimes make the mistake of not knowing where Santa Monica exactly is...

    :rolleyes:
    Reply -1
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @cloudskipa haha... them GT6 ones are cute as well... ;)


    edit: indeed psxman. he was. take the digital fight to me this time!
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 18/06/2014

    @cloudskipa Is Forza Horizon more like a simulation? Strange. It sometimes doesn't look so.



    :P

    I jest.

    Driveclub does look good though. Good to hear it is shaping up well. Hopefully it is arcadey enough to be instantly likeable. Have not put much effort into sim racing ever since GT1 and I sorely miss the days of games like V-Rally back on PS1. Anybody remember that?


    btw: recently had a Forza 5 contest at work against colleagues much younger than myself. Ended up... 2nd! :)
    Reply +2
  • Destiny's PlayStation-exclusive content detailed in full

  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @ziggy_played_guitar ouch. that did hurt. Do I? Look like skipa, but the polar opposite?

    naah. I still tend to think that I make sense and bring valid arguments. Instead of nonsense and invalid ones.

    :D

    :)

    :|

    :(

    really?
    Reply -5
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @sanctusmortis hearsay you say?

    I wouldn't really dare put this in that category.

    oh well. You are what you value.
    Reply -3
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @sanctusmortis
    Respawn saying they were looking for an exclusivity deal to focus their development of the game.
    Respawn didn't say that. They were multi-plat up until quite late into development, when MS struck a deal with EA, changing things. Mr. Zampella didn't really like that.

    There's a million articles about this as well, paraphrasing Respawn's CEO, yet you seem to vest more in one journalist's write-up, which is not even public domain?
    Reply -3
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @ziggy_played_guitar
    Kill your idols, http://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-exclusive-to-ps3-ps4-in-japan/1100-6420526/

    I'm sure, you'll spin that somehow. :D
    err... yea... I'll try... :S

    maybe Activision doesn't really think the mere translation to Japanese, the marketing, the support is worth it on a platform which will be only 4 days old by the time Destiny launches? A platform, the fortunes of which are highly doubtful in the land of the rising sun... and yes, maybe Sony coined on that in a bargain deal.
    Reply -4
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @jcaspian
    Sony need to Stop lying to people. This content is Timed exclusivity.
    according to the article you are commenting on, even their store said "timed exclusive", so what exactly are they lying about here?


    Sony are playing a game to make it seem alot of the games shown at E3 were Exclusive, missing out the term 'first on playstation' or 'Timed Exclusivity'.
    which games were that? And, I do suppose you are talking about "generic" game trailers, not the variants as shown in a PlayStation press conference? Why the hell would they show an Xbox logo during their press conferences for multi-plat games? Does Microsoft show any PS logo in their press conferences? (I actually never really paid attention to it; it just seems a strange thing to do).
    Reply +1
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Poncho_D
    It's been well documented that Sony were offered to fund Titanfall but they wanted it on the Vita, and refused to give out the information on the PS4. Which is fine, SCE know how to keep their house in order as the current market shows.
    there is only one source mentioning so, and it is not public. You need to pay I don't know how much for the 25.000 words.

    yet, like said, it's crazy to think a game, under EA (!!), coming from ex-Infinity Ward's head honchos, would not be made, were it not for an external funding. They probably funded the losses EA calculated had it been multi-plat. That seems right.


    You indicated that this was the same as paying to produce exclusive content, which it isn't. This game will still come to both consoles, just one group will have fancier tassels on their bicycles.
    yeah. as a matter of fact, I do not understand anymore why I wrote that comment, because you're right. It is different.

    MS buys games. Sony buys exclusive content. The former disallows a competing machine, the latter doesn't. The former is an MS exclusive practice, the latter isn't. Sony up until now has not paid for parity, nor exclusivity. The way it should be really.
    Reply -5
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Poncho_D
    Titanfall would likely fail to be made.
    sweet lord almighty. Titanfall had been in production for 360 and PS3 at a certain moment. It was the new game from the multi-billion CoD inventors and you actually believe that, should MS have not "funded development", it would likely fail to be made?

    yea... i'll take that with a grain of salt.
    Reply -5
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @muro
    As I seem to recall apparently MS saved Titanfall by actually funding its development. That's far different from buying exclusive content (which es I know MS has and also continues to do)
    lol.

    so "funding development" (i.e. investing cash) is different to "buying development" (i.e. investing cash)?

    mmmm-okay... :)
    Reply -2
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @Arsecake_Baker
    it would be interesting to know how much money Sony have thrown at Activision/Bungie to procure these 'exclusives'!
    Yeah... give us the price MS paid for Titanfall as well.

    That's a complete friggen game purchased for exclusivity. Not some downloadables.

    :rolleyes:
    Reply +8
  • MeBrains 17/06/2014

    @kevinlemonier you specifically register for this valuable addition?

    get paid much?
    Reply -16