icecaveman Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo was on the top for many many years until Sony came and beat them to it Xerus, that's what he meant... History will reapeat it self like it always has, like when ATARI was dominating the console market! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerus Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Everyone thought Nintendo was too strog to beat at one point, but look at them now. 586619115[/snapback] ...? What do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo was on the top for many many years until Sony came and beat them to it Xerus, that's what he meant... History will reapeat it self like it always has, like when ATARI was dominating the console market! 586619166[/snapback] Atari almost killed the console market and video games for that matter. Sony didn't really take away the marketplace from Nintendo. Nintendo's holding on the console marketplace started to decline with Sega and the Sega Genesis when they took a commanding hold of the marketplace from Nintendo. I think Sega had like 55%-65% of the market at its peak.Ugh how I miss the days of Sega Gensis and SNES, such simpler times when no one cared about the hardware and it was about the games. Two great consoles and great games for each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seta-san Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Better games? You mean games with better graphics... right? The PS3 will not be able to do any more than the PS2, or PS1 for that matter couldn't already do except with more/better shaders and a higher polygon count. Big whoop. Nintendo is right. The stupid graphics war is OVER. Games are starting to bore me and i'm looking for new and unique to even just hold my attention. The PS3 multi-core processor is going to be a horrible pain to code for. Anyone who's ever had to try to code an efficient multi-threaded program will attest to this. The difference between the graphics of all three system will be nearly the same and if you actually take the time to try to tell the difference who don't deserve to be playing. :no: Very sad to hear this. First space exploration slows down and now the evolution of advance technology in console gaming?Are humans really that simple, to pass prospects that will inevitably result in better games? Someone give me an answer, why slow down the evolution? Because its cheaper to develop for the other? To make your life easier? We just keep slowing down and down.... 586618518[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nav1 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 :no: Very sad to hear this. First space exploration slows down and now the evolution of advance technology in console gaming?Are humans really that simple, to pass prospects that will inevitably result in better games? Someone give me an answer, why slow down the evolution? Because its cheaper to develop for the other? To make your life easier? We just keep slowing down and down.... 586618518[/snapback] Well. it is a bussiness after all, and in order to make money and not gamble with your future, you have to keep costs down. The cost of making games increasing so much with it, would only make less developers making games, and maybe almost all only pursuing tried-and-true formulas, meaning, playing always the same things until it's not even funny anymore (that's my opinion anyways). The PS3 is an evolution in a way, but is it really the time to push so much for hardware power, specially having such fierce competition? You got all that from:My, someone has a creative imagination. 586618695[/snapback] Yeah, if anything, jmole would be more of a Nintendo fanboy than a Sony one (not saying that you are, nor intending to insult you, jmole). And, if anything, don't put so much heat on orangesoul, he's only providing news, from what I see from all sides, and even if he was one-sided, man, it's a free forum, what's the big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Sorry OrangeSoul, but according to JMole you're only allowed to post PS3 positive news on Neowin. anything that doesn't bathe the PS3 in a holy beam of magnificent light of extraordinary power and divine essence will be met by the usual fanboi comments form the PS3 army ;) 586618645[/snapback] lol, right on. :yes: You got all that from:My, someone has a creative imagination. 586618695[/snapback] Maybe you should see the dates of the article you posted and the ones in the first post. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Maybe you should see the dates of the article you posted and the ones in the first post. ;)586619336[/snapback] September 16th, 2005 and October 4th, 2005...? Your point? :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankee lion Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I think that the title is too strong, the PLAYSTATION platform will only lose a few developers next gen IMO. Still, you can't really tell until it happens huh? I don't like all this positive/negative hype, it's driving me crazy, just gimme the damn comsole already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzei Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Even if PS3 is more expensive to develop for wouldn't it make more sense to develop for the system where there is a actual chance of selling some copies of the game in Japan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erich Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 My favorite thing about jmole's article (if anyone cared to read it) was that the majority of the games are sequels... WOOHOOO, i can play a game I've already played before except with better graphics. Give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firen Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 My favorite thing about jmole's article (if anyone cared to read it) was that the majority of the games are sequels... WOOHOOO, i can play a game I've already played before except with better graphics. Give me a break. 586620010[/snapback] Nintendo was successful ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryvis Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I'm just insisting that the bigger the leap, if we do take it. Will eventually lead to more efficient code as the end result. The point is to adapt and push forward the barrier. I know how difficult it is to program for multiple cores, I've been there and yes its hards. It took me over a month to go through all the Quake 3 core sources to make the game more effective on my dual cpu system. (College project, don't ask.) My point, once you get a better understanding of it, you'll beable to effectivly tap into the power. Yes its a business, yes whats the point if you can't afford it and will kill your company by the end of the day. I just have my hopes on developers who can move technology forward, that they should take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReAnimation Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo was successful );) 586620037[/snapback] Exactly - its not like the 360's lineup is totally sequel free either. I don't have a problem with sequel titles as long as the sequel is worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erich Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo doesn't make sequels like every other company. Halo 1 -> Halo 2 = new media. Mario Bros. was almost as different as different can be when comparing sidescrollers to mario 2, Then again they did the same thing with Mario 3. Then Super Mario World was probably the closest to a sequel as you can get since it resembled Mario 3, but it's also heralded as probably the best sidescroller ever. Then Mario 64, again completely different. Just because the games have the same characters doesn't make it a copycat sequel. Puh-leaze. OMFG HALO 3 haz unblevzable gfx ROXOR!11!!one EDIT: As well Nintendo has designed a rock solid innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate product cycle that keeps games from EVER playing the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-byte Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo doesn't make sequels like every other company. Halo 1 -> Halo 2 = new media. Mario Bros. was almost as different as different can be when comparing sidescrollers to mario 2, Then again they did the same thing with Mario 3. Then Super Mario World was probably the closest to a sequel as you can get since it resembled Mario 3, but it's also heralded as probably the best sidescroller ever. Then Mario 64, again completely different.Just because the games have the same characters doesn't make it a copycat sequel. Puh-leaze. OMFG HALO 3 haz unblevzable gfx ROXOR!11!!one EDIT: As well Nintendo has designed a rock solid innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate product cycle that keeps games from EVER playing the same. 586620119[/snapback] Very true. When Sony/MS fanboys see Mario in a game they claim it to be a sequel. But that is not the case at all. It's more than that. About developers leaving PS3, I'm not surprised really. The PS2 was very difficult to develop for and it had three cores. The Cell have what? 8 cores? Hopefully for Sony the developerkits are improved significantly. What I don't like about PS3 is that Sony says it's not a gaming machine... What is it then? Can you imagine tha price it will get? It will be expensive, most definately the most expensive console. And if the development is expensive and timeconsuming, games will also be expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Sony could have learned a valuable lesson from the 80's. Sega vs Nintendo. Nobody stays on top for ever... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epimetheus Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Nintendo doesn't make sequels like every other company. Halo 1 -> Halo 2 = new media. Mario Bros. was almost as different as different can be when comparing sidescrollers to mario 2, Then again they did the same thing with Mario 3. Then Super Mario World was probably the closest to a sequel as you can get since it resembled Mario 3, but it's also heralded as probably the best sidescroller ever. Then Mario 64, again completely different.Just because the games have the same characters doesn't make it a copycat sequel. Puh-leaze. OMFG HALO 3 haz unblevzable gfx ROXOR!11!!one EDIT: As well Nintendo has designed a rock solid innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate-improve-innovate product cycle that keeps games from EVER playing the same. 586620119[/snapback] Mario Party 7 disagrees with you. :D Not to be bashing Nintendo or anything, they're already taking enough heat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 About developers leaving PS3, I'm not surprised really. The PS2 was very difficult to develop for and it had three cores. The Cell have what? 8 cores? Hopefully for Sony the developerkits are improved significantly.586620238[/snapback] Don't you find it funny though that the PS2 was supposedly the most difficult to work with yet it had the largest library of games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noveed Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Don't you find it funny though that the PS2 was supposedly the most difficult to work with yet it had the largest library of games? 586620455[/snapback] maybe because the Playstation franchise has been out for longer. also more game devs were with PS2 than any other console.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erich Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Mario Party 7 disagrees with you. :D Not to be bashing Nintendo or anything, they're already taking enough heat. 586620271[/snapback] I concur, Nintendo isn't perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-byte Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Don't you find it funny though that the PS2 was supposedly the most difficult to work with yet it had the largest library of games? 586620455[/snapback] The PS1 have a lot credit for that. It got very large 3rd party support. And since it had such large grip on the marked it's logical that PS2 got the biggest library of games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I concur, Nintendo isn't perfect. 586621281[/snapback] The levels on foot in Star Fox Adventures. *Shudders* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing-Man Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 The PS1 have a lot credit for that. It got very large 3rd party support. And since it had such large grip on the marked it's logical that PS2 got the biggest library of games. 586621347[/snapback] Even though the PS1 had a ton of third party support, you would think that developers outside Japan would switch to a different console if they thought the PS2 was so diffcult to work with, but they didn't. Companies like EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, continued to develop their multiplatform games with the PS2 in mind. So it is sort of a lame excuse that people say about the PS3 that developers won't develop for it because it is too hard to work with. They worked with the difficulties PS2, I am sure developers will do the same with the PS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinFix Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Even though the PS1 had a ton of third party support, you would think that developers outside Japan would switch to a different console if they thought the PS2 was so diffcult to work with, but they didn't. Companies like EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, continued to develop their multiplatform games with the PS2 in mind. So it is sort of a lame excuse that people say about the PS3 that developers won't develop for it because it is too hard to work with. They worked with the difficulties PS2, I am sure developers will do the same with the PS3. 586621392[/snapback] EA doesnt count, they dont put much effort in making (good)games ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davi Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I personally don't like EA games but that my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts