Oh, yeah, lol. My life's a real drag because I clicked on a few extra links.Its not really a problem of the information. The problems more with the fact you don't provide any then pretend you do. But then again, my life isnt so sad and boring that i can actually be bothered to read threw the topic and provide any more examples than the two posts i just quoted in this response...I might go on anti-depressants due to all the references I'll have to make. Seriously, what a moronic comment. And I provide sources when I provide a claim or stat of some sort. And if I don't, and it wasn't seen necessary by whoever responded, then I'll simply leave it as is.
No, the argument is that motion sensing on the PS3 was added as a knee-jerk reaction from Sony due to all the attention Nintendo was getting from their motion sensing controller. "/o.0 it has. The wii argument is that the wii uses significantly superior mention sensing technology, not that the ps3 copyed it.. well the argument from the non-fanboys at least "/
http://digg.com/gaming_news/CONFIRME...e_last_minute_
"Eurogamer: When did you first learn about this controller?
Dylan Jobe: We've really known officially for about a week and a half, and we did the final tuning just a couple of days ago" [A week and a half before the PS3 demo, lol]
lol no. Sony won an EMMY for its Dual-Shock controller, y'know, the one with rumble?Exsactly, Or did the fact the ps3 still has an actual controler and doent use motion senceing as its primary control mechnisms... and that dispute that the ps3 controller still won the EMMY for best controller "/
http://www.destructoid.com/sony-did-...is-29164.phtml
And in short, many titles which once used force-feedback on the PS2 will lack the functionality on the PS3. Also titles which use force-feedback on the Xbox 360 that will be ported to the PS3 will also lack this intuitive functionality. Why you think the PS3's lacking of a feature (that is included on the Wii) is a good thing is beyond me. Even though the PS3 is supposed to offer what the Wii does + more. For $600, removing old tech from a predeceasing console doesn't exactly give Sony brownie points either. "/
1) your argueing for the wii, not a hddvd player. The wii optical disk holds little more than a standard DVD. It cant even enter the same leaes as hddvd or blu-ray [A new format for the system was seen as pointless because games won't actually use all that space, so it'll just be asking developers to produce high-priced crap, as they are on the PS3 currently. Xbox 360 uses DVD-9, and it's still able to produce beautiful graphics without the need for a new storage medium. The HD-DVD add on is an option for the consumer if they decide to use their gaming console as a high-definition media player and the format isn't forced by the company as it is with Sony and it's PS3. "/]
2) the 12 cm wii optical drivers, run at about dvd*6 (7.93MB/sec). The ps3 has blu-ray*2 which runs at around (9 MB/s ) . Do the math. [Wii games are much smaller in terms of data than PS3 games, so load times are much quicker. oO]
3)Blu-ray can be used at *8 if you wana pay the money, and i like it alot more than i do a ps3, more as a storage medium, than anything else. [For regular storage, it's no doubt a great medium. The again, if it breaks then all your information is basically destroyed. "/]
4)The developers of a single title, dont really hold much weight, when most game deveropers are backing blu-ray in the format war. [That's actually a major release, so it's significant to know how it'll perform. And most developers aren't backing up Blu Ray on option. "/ If they want to develop games for the PS3, they're pretty much forced to do so, which drives development costs higher. "/]
5) Wii specs are pretty much inferior in every possible aspect to ps3, which is a proper 7th gen console, arguments from them are doommed to fail. Although i suggest takeing your own advice and getting the right info. [Wii's console specs areinferior, I never argued that they weren't, lol. But once again, saying that the PS3 is a 'proper 7th gen console' because it has the best specs is like saying you made a great painting because you used the best set of paints. "/]
6) This is completely irrelevant to the crapness of the iphone. You offered nill information, ether for nore against the claim.[Actually, if you see above my responses to you, you'll notice there's a rather large portion of my post dedicated to the argument. oO]Multi-touchIphone offers nothing that wont already be on the market(cheeper) when it comes out: True (that includes the name iphone, even that was nicked)
Results 151 to 160 of 179
-
-
Your probably the first case of selective reading ive ever come accross, ill give you that.
Originally Posted by HUGECOOL
Oh, yeah, lol. My life's a real drag because I clicked on a few extra links. I might go on anti-depressants due to all the references I'll have to make. Seriously, what a moronic comment. And I provide sources when I provide a claim or stat of some sort. And if I don't, and it wasn't seen necessary by whoever responded, then I'll simply leave it as is.
Dylan Jobe is a produce for games, he doesnt work for sony, nore have anything to do with the design of the ps3, nore its controllers. Your just useing the knolage from authority fallisy here.No, the argument is that motion sensing on the PS3 was added as a knee-jerk reaction from Sony due to all the attention Nintendo was getting from their motion sensing controller. "/
http://digg.com/gaming_news/CONFIRME...e_last_minute_
"Eurogamer: When did you first learn about this controller?
Dylan Jobe: We've really known officially for about a week and a half, and we did the final tuning just a couple of days ago" [A week and a half before the PS3 demo, lol]
1) it appears your right on the award, i read the information prior to the press release.lol no. Sony won an EMMY for its Dual-Shock controller, y'know, the one with rumble?
http://www.destructoid.com/sony-did-...is-29164.phtml
And in short, many titles which once used force-feedback on the PS2 will lack the functionality on the PS3. Also titles which use force-feedback on the Xbox 360 that will be ported to the PS3 will also lack this intuitive functionality. Why you think the PS3's lacking of a feature (that is included on the Wii) is a good thing is beyond me. Even though the PS3 is supposed to offer what the Wii does + more. For $600, removing old tech from a predeceasing console doesn't exactly give Sony brownie points either. "/
2) I havent managed to figure out, whether or not youve noticed the obvious problems duel shock, and motion senceing would cause if they were in the same controler... Controler vibrates, what do you think happens to the motion senceing?
Wii games are simplistitic and wouldnt use that much space, no, ps2 games fully use dvds and most the developers claim they will be easly able to put a full blu-ray disk in to use. The more space the better.A new format for the system was seen as pointless because games won't actually use all that space, so it'll just be asking developers to produce high-priced crap, as they are on the PS3 currently. Xbox 360 uses DVD-9, and it's still able to produce beautiful graphics without the need for a new storage medium. The HD-DVD add on is an option for the consumer if they decide to use their gaming console as a high-definition media player and the format isn't forced by the company as it is with Sony and it's PS3. "/
Plus your argueing from the wii, not a xbox, which is much more like a controler, plus microsoft wont be to botherd who wins the format war, there incodeing methods are in both.
Whats that got to do with anything? you said blu-ray was slower, i just proved its faster. Plus they wont load quicker, they will still load slower, theres just less to load.[Wii games are much smaller in terms of data than PS3 games, so load times are much quicker. oO
[quote] For regular storage, it's no doubt a great medium. The again, if it breaks then all your information is basically destroyed. "/[quote]
In the same way as a: harddrive, dvd, flashdisk, tape drive, hd-dvd,video tape, casset, CD, Record... peace of paper.... engraved stone... Well, put simply EVERY storage mechanism thats ever existed =.= You destroy what the information is stored on, the information also gets destroyed? Whats your point?
Actualy blu-ray disk are cheaper to produces. The higher costs are just an innital out lay, since blu-rays manufacture process is differnt, so they would need to update most there equipment, while hd-dvd uses very simlar proccesses to current dvds so less changes would be needed.That's actually a major release, so it's significant to know how it'll perform. And most developers aren't backing up Blu Ray on option. "/ If they want to develop games for the PS3, they're pretty much forced to do so, which drives development costs higher. "/
Plus, if developers werent forced to do anything, we'd still be useing megadrive style catriges as there cheaper... i mean, why in the wolrd would a game ever take more than a few kb of space....
o.0 not really, thats a pretty crap ananolgy and youve misused it pretty badly, Thats the analogy for the better console argument. Its a yth geniration console, becuse its in the 7th geniration of consoles, and uses the assoaited technolgys with them. The Wii doesnt use most of the 7th gen technolgys, hence aint 7th gen. If nokia made a 5210 now, they aint gona call it a 3g (3rd geniration)phone are they...Wii's console specs areinferior, I never argued that they weren't, lol. But once again, saying that the PS3 is a 'proper 7th gen console' because it has the best specs is like saying you made a great painting because you used the best set of paints. "/
Ok, your actualy right again, i disregarded the quotation as the top as a quotation, insted of part of your actual responce.Actually, if you see above my responses to you, you'll notice there's a rather large portion of my post dedicated to the argument. oO
No, it would if they releaced it now, but its actualy far off enough that smart phones with similar technolgy will enter the market before its own releace date "/Multi-touch
-
I responded to both your concerns, what's selective about it? I flipped my responses around and responded first to your second comment. o_OYour probably the first case of selective reading ive ever come accross, ill give you that.
That's right, he's a game producer. So why is he important, right? Well, he's the producer for the first PS3 game with motion technology- Warhawk. The development team were told about motion sensing *2 weeks* before the Sony keynote at E3, and had days before the event to tweak the controls a little. (Note: At the time of the keynote, a whole year after Sony first introduced the PS3, Warhawk was the only game that offered motion sensing.) So if motion sensing was an original plan of Sony's, why would they choose to release critical information about controller input just weeks before a major event? It doesn't make sense if it actually were a main feature.Dylan Jobe is a produce for games, he doesnt work for sony, nore have anything to do with the design of the ps3, nore its controllers. Your just useing the knolage from authority fallisy here.
That would be Sony's spin on the issue. The real issue was that Immersion, a company specializing in haptic technologies, sued Sony for using their force feedback on the Dual-Shock without licensing it. Sony ended up losing, paying ~$90M and almost being forced to stop production of PS2 consoles and controllers. Microsoft was sued as well, but they settled out of court with Immersion.1) it appears your right on the award, i read the information prior to the press release.
2) I havent managed to figure out, whether or not youve noticed the obvious problems duel shock, and motion senceing would cause if they were in the same controler... Controler vibrates, what do you think happens to the motion senceing?
Oh, and Pelican, a third-party accesory brand for all platforms, had already released a controller that featured both force-feedback *and* motion sensing back in *1999*. So here's a video a Playstation magazine made to show it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cOBtMMWteA
When have developers claimed full use of Blu Rays was happening? oO The only time I recall developers speaking about the storage space is when they mentioned that they *wouldn't* use the full disc, unless you can site otherwise. And I'm arguingWii games are simplistitic and wouldnt use that much space, no, ps2 games fully use dvds and most the developers claim they will be easly able to put a full blu-ray disk in to use. The more space the better.
Plus your argueing from the wii, not a xbox, which is much more like a controler, plus microsoft wont be to botherd who wins the format war, there incodeing methods are in both.
Not really, since DVDs have a variable speed depending on where its loading (inner or outter edge) while Blu-Ray will load at a constant rate. oO As an example, DVD x12 has a rate of ~9MB/s at minimum (inner edge), which is the roughly the same, or better, than a BD x2.Whats that got to do with anything? you said blu-ray was slower, i just proved its faster. Plus they wont load quicker, they will still load slower, theres just less to load.
Fault tolerance. And while Blu-Ray does offer many protections against everyday wear and tear, it's still just a disc. Sure, a hard drive is just a disc as well, but recovering data from the latter is already available while recovering data from a burned/shattered BD is pretty much impossible.In the same way as a: harddrive, dvd, flashdisk, tape drive, hd-dvd,video tape, casset, CD, Record... peace of paper.... engraved stone... Well, put simply EVERY storage mechanism thats ever existed =.= You destroy what the information is stored on, the information also gets destroyed? Whats your point?
I meant developers would have to unconditionally support the Blu-Ray format regardless of performance. Since the PS3's Blu-Ray player is internal and not external, the format is basically being used to lure support from the gaming market even when it isn't really needed.Actualy blu-ray disk are cheaper to produces. The higher costs are just an innital out lay, since blu-rays manufacture process is differnt, so they would need to update most there equipment, while hd-dvd uses very simlar proccesses to current dvds so less changes would be needed.
Plus, if developers werent forced to do anything, we'd still be useing megadrive style catriges as there cheaper... i mean, why in the wolrd would a game ever take more than a few kb of space....
So, with that logic, Xbox 360 isn't a next-gen console because it doesn't have motion sensing or offer the ability to read a high-definition format. oO The next generation of anything is just an upgrade to anything currently avialable in whatever its predeceding. The analogy I wrote was basically saying; You don't have a great product just because you used the best materials. Technological superiority doesn't mean your product will have ensured success. You have to have content that'll sell the product. Take last gen for example, the Gamecube was superior in specs, but the PS2 ended up winning the console battles. It was because of the games. Playstation 2's game library offered a very wide variety of games that attracted a much bigger audience. The PS3 so far has very lackluster games, and development costs don't help either which just drives the indie game market away from that console = less games. The Wii offers a much cheaper solution for developing games which has successfully driven more developers to make games for it. Point being, in game consoles, it doesn't matter what specs you boast if you don't have good games. Many consoles have flopped because of this.o.0 not really, thats a pretty crap ananolgy and youve misused it pretty badly, Thats the analogy for the better console argument. Its a yth geniration console, becuse its in the 7th geniration of consoles, and uses the assoaited technolgys with them. The Wii doesnt use most of the 7th gen technolgys, hence aint 7th gen. If nokia made a 5210 now, they aint gona call it a 3g (3rd geniration)phone are they...
Since the technology behind multi-touch is already patented, I don't really see that happening any time soon. There may be a similar solution but not the same one.No, it would if they releaced it now, but its actualy far off enough that smart phones with similar technolgy will enter the market before its own releace date "/
-
- that kinda went off topic didn't it? well, i've seen the iphone in action and it looks great in my opinion - i use macs all the time and i appreciate apple's superior build quality and stability of OSX - yip they're expensive, but i'd rather pay that than have to put up with some brick made by a pc company. the iphone will be supercompatible with my laptop so the extra price doesn't bother me at all, as it'll knock the pants off any other so-called smart phone 
-
Brick? Macs are bigger, looking at them in PC World... And Vista has no known Virus' that are serious, as of yet, so your argument is flawed completely. What has your laptop got to do with it knocking the pants off any other smart phone? Even though the iPhone isn't a smart phone, it's kinda useless really, it hasn't been said to offer anything other than a multi-touch screen, which will be on the market before it. Originally Posted by dog-egg
- that kinda went off topic didn't it? well, i've seen the iphone in action and it looks great in my opinion - i use macs all the time and i appreciate apple's superior build quality and stability of OSX - yip they're expensive, but i'd rather pay that than have to put up with some brick made by a pc company. the iphone will be supercompatible with my laptop so the extra price doesn't bother me at all, as it'll knock the pants off any other so-called smart phone LEFT
FOM & FOW
If you need me, feel free to PM me here for contact details.
-
ok lol - where shall we start? Macs are bigger eh? do you mean that the displays are thicker, cos if you do i think u'll find that they contain the actual computer too and don't need a crummy tower system meaning they take up less space, and the displays are premium quality. if you mean the laptops are bigger then maybe, but only cos they've got huge displays on some models, and there's no way you could mean thickness cos they've gotta be the slimmest on the market, and with built in top notch quality webcams too! Originally Posted by GommeInc
Vista has no known serious virus' yet? for one thing, OSX has NO virus' - yes - NONE! and macs can run Vista anyway so what's your point here? plus, at what point did i mention Vista in there? i just said i liked the stability of OSX...
if i had the choice of two smartphones, and one was more compatible with my laptop in terms of synching with schedules, emails etc then surely i'd choose that one, and seeing as i use a mac then i'd be an idiot NOT to choose an iphone... i don't think u've seen the demonstration of it have you? the viewing of full webpages, not just what your average phone tries to make you think is the internet, the incredibly smooth manipulation of graphics, the fact it actually runs OSX not a chopped down mobile version etc etc
btw - the sentence i highlighted doesn't make sense - did you mean to write 'even though the iphone IS a smartphone'
and 'kinda useless really'??? - show me a phone that does more ;P
go on lol - show me!
and as for multitouch screens coming out before the iphone does, perhaps they will but will they be better?
iphone will rock (at least in my eyes) - and arguing is fun isn't it?
-
The tower version of the Mac is rediculously huge. They're like 2 times bigger than a computers tower. When you get a Mac with the computer in the monitor, it just makes it less convenient when you want to upgrade your Mac. Yes, you probably don't need to, but anything needs updating once ina while, especially when there are people out there that love to customize their systems. Mac Books are huge in comparison to loads of laptops I've seen. My Sony Vaio is tiny and works pretty fast "/ Originally Posted by dog-egg
That yet could turn into a certain "no virus at all." I would hardly say Macs are superior. Go to any University in the UK and they'll make up so many jokes about OSX. My favourite at the moment is: Originally Posted by dog-egg
"The mouse on a Mac and PC are like a mans balls. The PC has 2 while a Mac has one."
Macs are a joke, just like you can imply in their adverts, they joke around, because that's what they are.
I've seen the demonstration of the iPhone. The CEO talked so much crap I got bored. As I've talked about, full web browsing is pointless if you cannot save parts of the pages to the phone itself. You might aswell do it at home on your PC/Mac. I also am confused with what you mean by "what makes you think is the internet." It connects to the internet, therefore uses the internet. What you said made no sense. Originally Posted by dog-egg
I don't see what Apple mean by running OS X. Looking at the phone, it is just like any other phone? What has it got from OS X on it?
This is where you lose the argument. The iPhone is inferior to the Sony Ericsson. Originally Posted by dog-egg
Face Warp
HP Print
Photo Mate
Radio
Games
Photo DJ
Music DJ
Video DJ
Remote Control (bluetooth)
The iPhone does only 2 of them (I imagine). This excludes the camera, MP3 Player, Video, SMS, MMS, Voice Mail, Internet, Calendar etc.
So the iPhone is just a miniscule smart phone at best. I wouldn't call it a Smart Phone, because there are loads of phones at there that do just what the iPhone does, plus more.
The iPhone is just another phone that is inferior to Sony Ericsson, even though there are loads of phones coming out soon that have the same technology. And you can't really use a multi-touch screen any different than any other multi-touch screen. Originally Posted by dog-egg
iphone will rock (at least in my eyes) - and arguing is fun isn't it?LEFT
FOM & FOW
If you need me, feel free to PM me here for contact details.
-
Common misconception from people who have never used a mac recently. The mouses actualy have a right and left click. Along with side squeeze buttons and a 360 degree scroll ball. Originally Posted by GommeInc
Full web browsing is pointless? What are you talking about. About 99% of what I do on the web i dont need to save parts onto my computer. You can go check your email or a web page. Even come on here and post on habbox. OF corse you could do it easier at home with a full keyboard and 20" screen but the point of the iPhone is that it is portable.I've seen the demonstration of the iPhone. The CEO talked so much crap I got bored. As I've talked about, full web browsing is pointless if you cannot save parts of the pages to the phone itself. You might aswell do it at home on your PC/Mac. I also am confused with what you mean by "what makes you think is the internet." It connects to the internet, therefore uses the internet. What you said made no sense.
It is a mini OS X. Like windows mobile on some phones.I don't see what Apple mean by running OS X. Looking at the phone, it is just like any other phone? What has it got from OS X on it?
-
sorry internet didnt move but sent all these
Last edited by BL!NKEY; 08-02-2007 at 01:04 AM.
-
sorry internet didnt move but sent all these
Last edited by BL!NKEY; 08-02-2007 at 01:05 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts