Sony not feeling blue about Jaffe's comments
Oo someone is pissed. "has earned the right to speak his mind on anything he wants when it comes to videogames." What if he talks about blu-ray... did he earn that right? Oh by the way, since you all gave me negative feedback for asking a question I will return the favor.
What are you babbling about? Sony acted cool by saying this, of course behind closed doors they will tell him what they really think but i like this. Everyone was expecting Sony to be hysteric about this and yet they said its okey. How would have Microsoft and Nintendo acted?
What the hell are you talking about? They said he's earned the right to talk about anything including blu-ray. Sony reacted rather level headed here and you still dog them?
And how DARE you disagree with him. News Article #1: (1st party developer) "I like this-n-that about PS3" Bladestar response = "He has to say that" News article #2: (1st party developer) "I don't like this-n-that about PS3" Bladestar response = "He doesn't have to say that"
Bladestar "Why I'm I here? Cause I can... then again I am willing to make a deal. I will not comment on PS3 articles if you and all Sony fanboys don't comment on 360 articles..." And yet here you are, first in line for a PS3 story, flaming all the way. Trying to get the first punch in before anyone else without an agenda has even spoken. Why is that? Do you really think your a gamer. What kind of gamer hates a games console. I bet you and your brother the mart, spend more time flaming PS3 and doing research to diss PS3 that you actually spend playing your Xboxes. You should thank Sony. If you didn't have Playstation to direct all your energys towards you might be bored all the time and top yourself. What a shame that would be.
@Bathyj, didn't you just spammed the halo post today.. all of you? Saying that Halo is overrated and it not a good game? You fanboys have not stopped. Besides I asked a question. which is legitimate... you you had to do is, "Yes he earned that right too" Period.
2. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a gamer. Just because PS is my obvious favourite doesn't mean I hate XB or Wii. Learn the difference between fan and fanboy. Do you want me to list the consoles I own or have owned? 3. I cant be responsible for what Sony fanboys do. They piss my off as well. Its hard to try and tell XBFB's not to flame and then a PSFB treads all over your point so I dont like them either. I do know but they're no where near as vocal or spiteful as the XBFB's are and most the time there just reacting to getting flamed. After who posted first on this story? 4. Since you were one who made the comment of offering to stop (and it was a real nice gesture BTW, I did have hope it would come true) maybe you should lead by example and then actually see if the PSFB's quiet down. Dont you realise its a vicious circle. They aren't going to stop til they see you making the effort first. Anyway I'll continue to live in hope. But if I see another postive PS3 story and your the first person to post, trying to take the gloss off it, I'll know you haven't listen or considered a word I've said.
I like his attitude... kinda revolutionary?. Only the time will decide if large storage are need it this gen or not.
Sony isn't overly controlling, and critisism from their own employees is actually helpful. Jaffe explained why he felt that the exclusion of Blu-ray would have helped Sony in the short term, and Sony feels the same way. In fact, I feel the same way. When looking at the long term effects however, it was obviously a great investment since it helps differentiate the PS3 from the 360. I mean, the PS3 still would have been priced at $500~600 had Blu-ray not been there anyway. It's the stuff like Bluetooth Wireless, Gigabit Ethernet, HDMI 1.3, etc, that jacked up the production costs.
Read behind the lines. Sony won't come down hard on Jaffe because it's afraid that if they alienate him, he'll defect to its competitors. Sony will put up with this loose cannon only for as long as he puts out badly needed hits for its console. Once his well runs dry, watch out. Besides, a lot of Sony people probably agree with what he's saying, whether they care to admit it or not.
But Jaffe's quote was taken out of context to sensationalize the next part of the interview series. Which is what I and many other people had said in that story thread from yesterday. What a difference a day makes. Yesterday, internet news sites like Digg.com and GameDaily.biz were on fire with a controversial story in which David Jaffe appeared to recommend dropping Blu-ray from the PlayStation 3. The sites included inflammatory headlines such as "Jaffe: I Would Not Have Included Blu-ray in PS3." The only problem is, it's becoming increasingly clear that Jaffe didn't actually say this. A trusted source just told GamePro that "it looks like GameTrailers is trying to sensationalize this [controversy] by only using a snippet" of the interview, which is due to air in an upcoming segment. "Jaffe actually answers that question by saying he thinks the PS3 is perfect the way it is," our source continues, "but in his personal opinion he would have removed Blu-ray to make it cheaper. He goes on to say that Sony is smarter than him when it comes to this stuff." Sony also tells GamePro that "David Jaffe is an industry pioneer who has earned the right to speak his mind on anything he wants when it comes to videogames." Read the full story here. http://www.gamepro.com/news...
Jaffe always speak his mind and tells it like its. The F'ing MAn. TFM.
or maybe David Jaffe. possibly even Kratos himself. on topic, i said yesterday that the quote was taken out of context simply to get people fired up. i guarantee when they release the actual interview, it's going to get so many hits the servers will probably crash. which is exactly what they wanted, really. massive hits. i mean, it's like everyone across the net forgot how advertising works. we all watch TV, read comic books, see movies. we know that businesses use the sensationalistic angle to advertise themselves and there services. only on the internet will people take what they read/see/hear, at face value, no matter how out of context it's presented.
"We want to force Blu-ray down the throats of gamers. In the past years the only division of Sony that has made a great profit was the playstation division. We felt that we could use this to push any media format to the masses at the expense of gamers. We know that most Sony gamers are only little kids with 13" BW TV's in their rooms, but Blu-ray is our vision. We know that if we were not a movie company we would have used DVD 9 in the PS3 to make it affordable to all of our loyal fans. We would also like to thank Mr. Jaffe (Jerk) for making Blu-ray news once again. Thanks to all the people that do not want or need Blu-ray for buying our system" Man I want Killzone PS3. Give it to me now.
You realise Killzone will be on BR don't you? And most likely bigger than 10GB. Looks like you need BR and dont even know it. It doesn't mean you have to buy movies but if you don't want to so no one is forcing anything on anyone.
i'm so sick of hearing the "Sony is forcing Blu Ray down people's throats" bs i could just pop. imagine, if you will, that McDonalds is releasing a new burger, made entirely of grass. you don't want a burger made entirely of grass, so, what do you do? *YOU DON'T BUY IT.* the same thing applies here. if you don't want Blu Ray, *YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY A PS3* there are other gaming alternatives here, people. Sony isn't holding a gun to your head, saying "Buy a PS3, Bizzle!" they are offering a piece of consumer electronics, and if you want it, you get it. each of the 3.15 million people that have purchased Playstation 3's thus far know exactly what we were getting when we plunked down our cash. at $600 a pop, you'd be a fool to just blindly buy it. i bought a PS3 over a 360 *PRECISELY* because it comes equipped with things like Blu Ray (for games and movies), a 60 gig, upgradeable HDD, massive USB periphial support, internet browser, free online, Wi Fi, HDMI (for my future HDTV purchase this year), and, of course, the lineup of software hitting this year and beyond. if there was no PS3 offering me these things in one go, i'd have to pay $400 for the X Box 360, $200 for the HD DVD drive, and $100 for the Wi Fi adaptor, for a total of $700 altogether. oh yeah, and if i ever got the urge to play online, i'd have to chock up another $50 a year. i didn't just say, "Durr, i got, uh, 700 smackers to blow, and that PS3 sure looks purty! look, Ma, it has that there Speeder-Man font on it! I gotta get it!" consumers, especially consumers of high end electronics, are smarter than what you are giving them credit for. bottom line, if you don't want something, you don't have to buy it. no one, whether they be Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo, are forcing you to do anything you don't want to do. if i didn't want what the PS3 was offering, and thought that it was worth the $600 i paid for it, i wouldn't have purchased it. sheesh, the American tendency to want to shurk personal responsibility has seeped even into the gaming world. if i bought a PS3 because Sony told me to, i'd be a moron. if i bought a 360 because Microsoft told me to, i'd be a moron. if i bought a Wii because Nintendo told me to, i'd be a moron. if i bought the above because i damn well wanted to, that makes me an individual. *edit - i didn't want to get into this, but you do know that the cost of HDTVs has been dropping significantly, and you don't *HAVE* to have that 50" 1080p monster set in your bedroom/living room, you know? a 19-32" 720p HDTV is rather affordable nowadays. here's few i found on newegg.com to get you started: 19" LCD 720p/1080i set - $279 26" LCD 720p set - $359 27" LCD 720p set - $399 32" LCD 720p/1080i set - $499 37" LCD 720p/1080i set - $629 i could go on, but you get the point. and just think, the prices of these TVs are dropping on a monthly/weekly basis. by years end, even the 40" sets will be down in price. lesson learned? 1.) no one is forcing any one of us to buy their products. 2.)people buy what they want, and avoid what they don't.
I want a PS3. I don't want Blu-Ray. Sony is forcing me to take Blu-Ray, when they could multi-disc any game that was large enough to need more than 9GB. It's absolute bullshit, and I take extreme offense to it. Give me a choice like Microsoft did, and I'll be happy to buy a PS3 tomorrow. I prefer HD-DVD's clarity to that of Blu-Ray, so why should I be forced to spend the extra money on a sub-par High Def disc player? And this statement: "To do that, you need a storage vehicle such as the 50 GB Blu-ray disc, because your standard 9 GB DVD simply can't handle the demands of true next-generation gaming." Is asinine. If you believe that for a second you are a fool, period. Hey guess what, 3 DVD9's and we have a Blu Ray. And it's still cheaper for the 3 discs. Guess where every manufacturer save one of Blu Ray media is? Japan. the one left over is a German owned subsidary in Hong Kong (Baer Moss). DVD's are manufactured EVERYWHERE, and are much, MUCH cheaper. The "storage" argument is weak and only a blind fanboy would give it any credence whatsoever. <<edit>> And before you ask, yes I have 1080p. 46" Samsung DLP http://i3.photobucket.com/a... <</edit>>
but what happens, Game, when, say, a *SANDBOX* style game needs more than 8 gigs? can you imagine how @sstacular it would be to have to swap discs each time you went from city to city? sure, for linear games, multiple discs isn't so much a problem. it's a bit 1996, but it's not too irritating. if technology has evolved, however, why *NOT use it? why am i, and those like me, a fool, if we think a game will require more than 8 gigs? let me paint this picture for you: Super Mario World was not possible on a NES cartridge or the NES. Neither was Pilot Wings or Super Mario Kart. why? answer: horsepower and *STORAGE CAPACITY. so the SNES used a larger capacity cartridge. Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII were not possible on an SNES catridge. why? answer: horsepower and *STORAGE CAPACITY. so MGS and FFVII used multiple CDs. Grand Theft Auto 3 and Halo were not possible on a PS1 CD. why? answer: horsepower and storage capicity. so GTA3 was only possible on a DVD. do you see the trend emerging? what's foolish is if you think that games won't get any bigger than what they are now. it's silly talk. about half way through this last generation, 4 gig discs were no longer viable for *CERTAIN TYPES of games. not all games, just certain types. Lego Star Wars, for example, is still on a CD, whereas GTA3 is on a DVD. a larger disc was needed. thank god for Dual Layer DVDs. another 3/4 years, and we have games like Gears of War and Mass Effect that are reportedly being crammed to fit on a Dual Layer DVD. are you telling me that the games of tomorrow (which we still haven't seen yet; Gears of War is last gen gameplay with Next Gen graphics), will not need more space? for linear, more story oriented experiences, multiple discs are fine. but considering that games nowadays have a *LOT of open-ended, non-linear gameplay, multiple discs would *KILL the experience, no excuses, ifs, ands, or buts about it. sandbox style gameplay would be atrocious on multiple discs. "b-b-b-b-but, downloadable content!" do you really want the hassle of having to manage your HDD every time you want to play a game? considering that HD assets are rather large, downloadable content will baloon beyond the 1gig mark sooner rather than later, if you went with that model. there is a reason why digital distribution hasn't taken off yet. the bandwidth needed is too little, and the size of the files would be too big. if anything, we are still a generation or two away from digital distribution being more than just a niche market for smaller products and transactions. in the meantime, we're getting our "big" games on a disc. whether Blu Ray takes off for movies is irrelevent, the games are still on Blu Ray, and they will *REQUIRE a larger format, whether it be HD DVD or Blu Ray. so far, i haven't seen a developer yet that's b*tched about having more disc capacity. if anything, all i've heard is, "now we don't have to compress as much data, so there's no loss of quality in either textures or sound." "now we have the room to add things that we planned on having, instead of having to nix them do to storage issues." "we've reached the limits of what the DVD can hold, and we've had to cram and compress our data just to get it to fit." when you have Hideo Kojima (a developer that not a single one of us would say is "lazy," or does anything "half assed.") saying that a 25gig Blu Ray *STILL may not be enough for MGS4, you know there's something to it. and Kojima doesn't use CG cinema in his games, so he's not using the room for HD cinemas like, say, Square-Enix would. it seems to me that people are rebelling against Blu Ray because it's backed by Sony. there's no problem with you prefering HD DVD over Blu Ray, but come on, they're using the *SAME EXACT CODECS now. i've seen both, and picture quality is practically identical. any difference i've seen between them both is just splitting hairs. the simple truth of the matter is that HD DVD holds 15/30gigs, and Blu Ray holds 25/50gigs. the audio and picture quality thus far, is very, very close. and the price of both are the same also (HD DVDs and Blu Rays both cost $24.99-$29.99 here in Los Angeles). have you even seen a Blu Ray movie playing on the PS3? the quality is amazing! this isn't like the sh*tty DVD player that was in the PS2. not by a long shot. personally, i think they are both great HD formats, but Blu Ray has the most support. if you want the Spider-Man films in HD, or Star Wars (you know it's coming; George won't pass up a chance to make money), Pixar films, Fox films, etc, you'll only find them on Blu Ray. eventually, Universal will crack, and even they'll support Blu Ray. though i imagine it won't be until next year. afterall, they are a business like any other. they want to make money, and they'll support the format that will, ultimately, make them a lot of money. Blu Ray is at the head of the pack for now, and with heavy hitter movies like the ones i mentioned above coming exclusively to the format, they will contine to stay in the lead. last i heard, Blu Ray wasn't that much more expensive to produce than HD DVD. i'll have to double check later, as it's getting late, but even so, as Blu Ray further entrenches itself as the HD media of choice (it's still outselling HD DVD month in and month out, that lead is only going to increase as more Blu Ray movies are released, the cost of HD TVs go down, and PS3s are sold), the cost to manufacture said discs are going to be cheap. it really does seem to me that you have a bias towards Sony and Blu Ray. i don't hate HD DVD, and if the 360 supported it for games, i'd be all over it, but it doesn't. my argument still stands: looking at the history of video games and storage capacity in particular, each successive generation has benefitted from having larger capacity storage. that's not conjecture or speculation, it's simple fact. thanks to CD, and thanks to DVD, we have been able to create games, and game worlds that were never possible on prior forms of storage. it's just fact. why that suddenly won't be the case this time around is beyond me. no one wants to thank Sony for making DVD the norm for the past year. that proved to be a rather forward-thinking decision, even though it upped the price of the PS2 (which was considered expensive back in 1999). Sony doesn't owe any of us a damn thing. and neither does Microsoft or Nintendo. they are offering us a product. we don't have to buy it, even if we want it. you can get pissy at them all you want, but at the end of the day, the PS3 is the way it is, with the features it has. i understand your frustration, but there's nothing you can do but not buy the console if it upsets you that much. again, there are other options out there. the PS3 and 360 are getting a lot of the same games. if you really want to play those PS3 exclusives (like i do), you'll buy the machine. last i checked, each and every PS3 game is being printed on a Blu Ray disc, so it's not like the drive is only meant, or being used, for movies. i guess i just don't see what the big fuss about Blu Ray's inclusion is. the console was going to be expensive regardless (the Wi Fi adaptor, memory stick readers, and HDMI would have added, at least, $100 to the price anyway).
First, let's address the hypothetical 10GB+ sandbox game. Now, with this generations hardware and graphic limitations (PS3 and 360 are similar processing wise, at least for this argument) one could argue that a 25GB (half a BD-Rom) game would have an explorable area similar to that of the entire British Isles (Ask anyone who lives in the British Isles how much of it they have personally explored, or could given a year and free resources). Let's add in the programming time and R&D time to code that amount of area data, along with interaction, physics, and any transition areas so the system memory isn't over-taxed. (Remember, 50GB is on the disc, but the PS3 can only see 256MB of video and 256 MB of audio at any given time) Assuming, (and it's a HUGE assumption) that the cost of this amount of effort doesn't get prohibitively high, then you have to add in the coding for the interface, a method of interactivity between the player character and the environment, collision, vehicles (you aren't walking that whole time are you?) NPC's, textures and other modeling etc. If the devs are still under budget, they go gold with a game that has near infinite replayability, that maybe 3% of the audience is going to invest the time in to finish. Add into that the publisher worries, if they sell a game that has more than 600 hours of gameplay, will they sell anything else? Will sales of other games suffer because of a game that has no ready solution? As to the HD-DVD movies vs. Blu-Ray movies, I was under the impression that the Blu Ray movies were still using that bastardized version of MPEG-2. In any case they still load slower, and I may split hairs, but I paid almost $4K for my television, and I want the best picture possible. From personal experience with the PS3, HD-DVD add-on for the 360, the crappy LG Hybrid HD player my wife bought, and a very nice Toshiba job I demoed at Tweeter, the HD-DVD had higher clarity and lower load time, so that's what I want to go with. If Blu-Ray has started using a format more similar to the HD-DVD format, I may look at it again, but I still have no need for it other than movies, and neither do you, or any gamer, or even Mr. Kojima himself. Multi-disc works fine in 99.99% of genres out there, at least those that I've been exposed to in 30 years of gaming. Did Sony make DVD the norm? DVD's were movie standard for a while, and it was a pretty logical progression for the XBox, PS2 and Gamecube to use DVD media. Keep in mind that while DVd's were availiable for use on the PS2, many games still came out on CD-Rom. The XBox was the only system to actually standardize DVDs, besides the Gamecube, but that used a miniDVD. Space was not an issue for most NES games. In the cartridge days, if you needed more space, you made the cart bigger. there wasn't an issue with addressing the extra space, since the cart acted as more of a ROM expansion of a system than a piece of software limited by a strict hardware configuration. The best evidence of this is reading some of the boxes for cartridges, especially Sega Master System carts which often stated the size of the cart if it was bigger than 200K (you had games that were labeled 1 Mbit, 2Mbit, and , like Phantasy Star, 4Mbit) The reason those games were not possible was NOT storage capacity. Cartridges have no such limitations. Even the Atari VCS/2600 had games that ran into 1 or 2 Megabytes when used with a tape loader or Gameline. So your argument is not valid historically, and mine still stands that it is better to have a choice than to be forced. However, your well thought out (if not researched) argument does earn you a bubble from me. May we debate more in the future.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.