Me too lol!!! Hell they release a couple of screens a year kind of hard to remember when thats all you get.

Can you believe it new Wardevil screens!!! http://www.ps3center.net/news/3768/new-wardevil-screens-from-official-site/

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"]

snip

Hiroshi_Ichirou

Bleh, I have no interest in talking to someone like you this time of night. The other guy is as much of a diehard PS3 fanboy but at least he recognises the arguments being made, you apparently have difficulty with that.

More RPG's, platformers, and RTS please.

I'm glad some of the titles you mentioned got delayed otherwise my wallet would have cried. :cry:

[QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"]

So long story short your just jealous of Sony's exclusives. :lol:

As I said... you don't recognise what is being said, you just make a fanboy response to what you would like my responses to mean.

The other guy can be talked to, you are a waste of time.

[QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"]

snip

AnnoyedDragon

Bleh, I have no interest in talking to someone like you this time of night. The other guy is as much as a diehard PS3 fanboy but at least he recognises the arguments being made, you apparently have difficulty with that.

[QUOTE="Hiroshi_Ichirou"]Well what you see as damage, looks like a so called benefit to me.AnnoyedDragon

Looks like I'm going to have to elaborate on this...

Console companies make their money on the licensing fee charge they put on games sold on their platform, sort of a cut for the privilege of letting developers sell to their install base. This is so important in profiting from a console that consoles launching at a loss is not uncommon, they take a financial hit on the hardware and milk it back on software sales.

When you fund your own games you don't get a licensing fee cut, you make your money back on selling the actual game. However development costs this generation have reached a point were going cross platform is the best way to ensure a decent profit. The 1st party don't want this of course, they keep their self funded games exclusive. This means they are funding the development of a game that really should go cross platform to cover its costs, but they are keeping it exclusive.

This makes the profit margins on self funded titles small compared to cross platform games, more than likely so small that most 3rd party developers wouldn't even consider it. But you have to differentiate your platform, if the 3rd party aren't willing to do it then you have to. The aim is to attract people to your platform with the exclusives, then hope once there they buy your versions of cross platform games; enabling you to milk them for licensing fees.

If you own a PS3 you are already costing Sony money because they are sold at a loss, the slim included. Their hope is that you go on to buy games that they can just sit back and profit on like 3rd party titles, but you just admitted to not caring about 3rd party games; only the high quality 1st party funded ones. By only buying 1st party games you are only buying the ones with small profit margins for Sony, because as stated they are high budget titles Sony invested in that are being restricted to one platform.

By limiting yourself to games like Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, Killzone 2 etc. you are essentially hurting Sony and slowing their effort to catch up with the competition.

Also...

We have a reason to blame the developers more than you'll ever know...

Hiroshi_Ichirou

Your entire argument here relay's on 360 being used as the lead in every game, but people in SW know that to not be the case. There are a variety of PS3 lead games out there, developers even encourage it because it avoids the 360 to PS3 headaches you described. Your argument assumes there are no PS3 lead cross platform games out there, the problem for you is there are.

[QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"]

It's their console, you act as if that is supposed to mean something.

[QUOTE="2beers_in_hand"]

You should alsounderstand that Sony is willing to have one over their teams come over and help developers who are having trouble with the PS3 architecture. Oh but waitit seems you glazed over that part right?

AnnoyedDragon

Common knowledge, but it doesn't compare to the support a Sony published title gets.

So how is it Sony's fault if the developers in question are either to lazy or unwilling to ask Sony for help?

2beers_in_hand

You freaking Cows all sound alike :roll: You all blame everyone for PS3 development difficulty, absolutely everyone, but not the people who made the system.

So in your perfect world company's like Sony are greedy self centered conglomerates who are only out to make their games better. How dare they do such a thing!!! Its wrong for them to send out their best tech specialist to help out third party companies who have difficulty with PS3's tech. Instead Sony should scrap their whole first and second party game'sand insteadrush tohelp out all thosepoor struggling Dev's. Those evil bastards!!! Forget the Edge tool set they should make custom tool kits for each and every dev out there right? How could they evendare try to push innovation by trying out different hardware spec's and trying new things. We all understand that new technology can only be achieved by doing the same old thing over and over again. :roll:

[QUOTE="After_Math"] Could you name Sony's first party? FYI, Insomniac and Suckerpunch, as well as some others Cows claim to be first party don't count. Guerilla and Naughtydog are first party however.AnnoyedDragon

As far as I'm concerned any Sony published title has artificial advantages over 3rd party games. Whether or not it is technicaly 1st party doesn't change it is getting support that developers simply selling a game on PS3 does not get.

It's irritating when people use Sony published titles as a counter argument to PS3s development difficulty. Would games like Killzone 2, Uncharted 2 and Heavy Rain exist exclusivly on PS3 if it wasn't for Sony? I don't think so.