http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-says-highly-placed-source/

Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on 
Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an 
360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".

"There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's 
inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If 
FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's 
a slam dunk."

Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the 
Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.

Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.

On Jul 17, 2:30 pm, "Hellboy"  wrote:
> http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-s...
>
> Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on
> Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an
> 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>
> "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's
> inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If
> FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's
> a slam dunk."
>
> Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the
> Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>
> Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.

No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
Dragon...

In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
25c6b4c6186f@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahnynla@mindspring.com 
says...
> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
> 
> No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> Dragon...
> 
> 
Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no 
reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a 
HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if 
that was the case.

On Jul 17, 4:55 pm, Sean  wrote:
> In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
> 25c6b4c61...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahny...@mindspring.com
> says...> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
> > No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> > Dragon...
>
> Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no
> reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a
> HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if
> that was the case.

Or the Fall update with game installation. Remember that?

Jonah Falcon wrote:
> On Jul 17, 4:55 pm, Sean  wrote:
>> In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
>> 25c6b4c61...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahny...@mindspring.com
>> says...> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>>
>>> No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
>>> Dragon...
>> Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no
>> reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a
>> HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if
>> that was the case.
> 
> Or the Fall update with game installation. Remember that?

Play from hard drive. Copy your games from the game disc and play 
directly from the hard drive. Not only will the drive not spin, but load 
times are quicker, as well. Of course, you will still need the disc in 
the tray to prove you own the game.

http://majornelson.com/

-- 
http://lfcvideotrial.com/scoopex

http://flickr.com/photos/scoopex/

Jonah Falcon wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2:30 pm, "Hellboy"  wrote:
>> http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-s...
>>
>> Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on
>> Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an
>> 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>>
>> "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's
>> inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If
>> FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's
>> a slam dunk."
>>
>> Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the
>> Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>>
>> Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
> 
> No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> Dragon...

Nah I'm sure a few people did but it really wasn't a big deal.

"Hellboy"  wrote in message 
news:ScMfk.113655$gc5.52320@pd7urf2no...
> http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-says-highly-placed-source/
>
> Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on 
> Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an 
> 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>
> "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. 
> "It's inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US 
> alone. If FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, 
> Metal Gear's a slam dunk."
>
> Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the 
> Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>
> Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
>


I removed the X-Post as I'm not subbed to any of the other groups.  I 
wouldn't get too excited about this, I've got MGS4 on PS3, it's so 
incredibly over-rated and disappointing.  Just boring, slow, and the gfx 
were frankly a bit disappointing (running at 1080p on 42" Panasonic 1080p 
TV).

Its the best game I've yet played on my PS3, by a distance, but tbh the only 
use the PS3 gets is as a BluRay player - although that was the primary 
reason I bought it, I was happy with my Xbox and I knew the PS3 had no good 
games (none that I couldn't get on my Xbox anyway), I just wanted a BR 
player an the PS3 one is one of the best on the market, with the huge plus 
of been updatable for new BR standards.  And when bought as a BR player it 
comes with a free games console, that someday might see GranTurismo 5 :-)  I 
have GT5 Prologue, but it's laughable heh - I'm certain GT5 will be nothing 
like it, as I've loved the last 4 GT games.

I also have Motorstorm - has anyone else here played this?  It's absolutely 
dismal, it would've been crap for a PS2 game to be honest - I can't see how 
it got released in this half-done state - I assume as it was a launch title 
it was rushed :-(.

-- 
Dan
Clio R27 F1 #65

On Jul 17, 4:49 pm, Jonah Falcon  wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2:30 pm, "Hellboy"  wrote:
>
> >http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-s...
>
> > Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on
> > Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an
> > 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>
> > "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's
> > inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If
> > FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's
> > a slam dunk."
>
> > Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the
> > Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>
> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
> No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> Dragon...

a) People are used to multiple discs for JRPGs.

b) RPGs are much slower paced so a "break" isn't as noticeable.

c) Blue Dragon was 3 discs. Lost Odyssey was 4 discs. Metal Gear Solid
4 for the Xbox 360 would need 6 discs just to match the quality of
textures and sound of the PS3 version.

On Jul 17, 4:55 pm, Sean  wrote:
> In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
> 25c6b4c61...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahny...@mindspring.com
> says...> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
> > No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> > Dragon...
>
> Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no
> reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a
> HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if
> that was the case.

You *do* realize that the game took up every last bit on a 50GB dual-
layer Blu-Ray disc, right?

The potential 360 version would require 6 discs to be able to match
that amount of space.

Of course, they could decide to compress the audio and textures but
that would result in a much poorer gaming experience (and I don't
think Kojima would be game for that considering he was already
complaining about how the Blu-Ray disc wasn't enough).

On Jul 17, 4:59 pm, Jonah Falcon  wrote:
> On Jul 17, 4:55 pm, Sean  wrote:
>
> > In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
> > 25c6b4c61...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahny...@mindspring.com
> > says...> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
> > > No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> > > Dragon...
>
> > Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no
> > reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a
> > HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if
> > that was the case.
>
> Or the Fall update with game installation. Remember that?

Let's not forget that most people have a 20GB hard drive (as opposed
to no hard drive or the 120GB hard drive). That's not even enough
space to copy the 50GB.

On Jul 17, 5:03 pm, scoopex  wrote:
> Jonah Falcon wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 4:55 pm, Sean  wrote:
> >> In article <0863dd9a-4f8b-4ccd-b4d8-
> >> 25c6b4c61...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jonahny...@mindspring.com
> >> says...> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.
>
> >>> No one's complained about the multi-discs in Lost Odyssey or Blue
> >>> Dragon...
> >> Why anyone would want to play it is a mystery to me. :o) However no
> >> reason why a 2nd disc with all the video on it could not be saved to a
> >> HDD and played when needed. This could be a HDD only game for the 360 if
> >> that was the case.
>
> > Or the Fall update with game installation. Remember that?
>
> Play from hard drive. Copy your games from the game disc and play
> directly from the hard drive. Not only will the drive not spin, but load
> times are quicker, as well. Of course, you will still need the disc in
> the tray to prove you own the game.
>
> http://majornelson.com/

Great for the handful of people who have the 120GB hard drive...

I'm sure some version of MGS4 will hit Xbox 360 in 2009.
It won't be a big surprise.
MGS2: Substance came out on original Xbox in 2002.

On Jul 17, 11:30 am, "Hellboy"  wrote:
> http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-s...
>
> Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on
> Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an
> 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>
> "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's
> inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If
> FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's
> a slam dunk."
>
> Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the
> Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>
> Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.

On Jul 18, 9:49 am, NV55  wrote:
> I'm sure some version of MGS4 will hit Xbox 360 in 2009.
> It won't be a big surprise.
> MGS2: Substance came out on original Xbox in 2002.

He wasn't very happy about it and wasn't very happy with the results.
After that, he swore he'd never port another MGS game to the Xbox
platform. Of course, things can change over the course of 6 or so
years, but Kojima has reiterated his complete and total lack of
interest in porting the game to the 360 (which, of course, is not to
say that Konami would not just get another team to do it).

> On Jul 17, 11:30 am, "Hellboy"  wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://www.videogaming247.com/2008/07/15/mgs4-on-360-its-inevitable-s...
>
> > Following last night's shock news that Final Fantasy XIII will release on
> > Xbox 360, VG247 has been told be a very senior UK industry source that an
> > 360 version of Metal Gear Solid 4 is "inevitable".
>
> > "There's only MGS left now: for a few months at least," said the mole. "It's
> > inevitable. Konami knows how many million they'd sell in the US alone. If
> > FFXIII can make it to 360 when Sony owns nine percent of Square, Metal Gear's
> > a slam dunk."
>
> > Kojima has constantly said that the game isn't transferable to 360 as the
> > Microsoft console uses DVD as opposed to Blu-ray.
>
> > Money, as everyone's mother used to say, talks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Jul 18, 10:47 am, The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
> On Jul 18, 9:49 am, NV55  wrote:
>
> > I'm sure some version of MGS4 will hit Xbox 360 in 2009.
> > It won't be a big surprise.
> > MGS2: Substance came out on original Xbox in 2002.
>
> He wasn't very happy about it and wasn't very happy with the results.
> After that, he swore he'd never port another MGS game to the Xbox
> platform.

Um, one word:

Bullshit.

On Jul 18, 1:19 pm, Jonah Falcon  wrote:
> On Jul 18, 10:47 am, The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
>
> > On Jul 18, 9:49 am, NV55  wrote:
>
> > > I'm sure some version of MGS4 will hit Xbox 360 in 2009.
> > > It won't be a big surprise.
> > > MGS2: Substance came out on original Xbox in 2002.
>
> > He wasn't very happy about it and wasn't very happy with the results.
> > After that, he swore he'd never port another MGS game to the Xbox
> > platform.
>
> Um, one word:
>
> Bullshit.

Kojima stated early that he did not want to port Metal Gear Solid 2 to
the Xbox because the game was designed for the Playstation 2 hardware.
He is still very adamant about not porting his games since the end
result will never be what he intended.

He was not happy about the issues with performance of the Xbox version
of Metal Gear Solid 2: Substance and stated that he would not port
anymore games to the Xbox platforms.

Was Metal Gear Solid 3 ever ported to the Xbox? No? Thank you.

Now that everyone's on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 platforms,
Kojima is still clinging to his belief that his games should not be
ported. Perhaps he designs the fifth Metal Gear Solid game to be on
the Xbox 360 but otherwise he won't be involved. That's not to say
that Konami won't go ahead without his "approval" (as if they really
need that when it comes down to it).

And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
Metal Gear Solid 3.

Nice try, though, dumbass.

>"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
>news:335cb1c2-8b3e-4122-949b-828afe014881@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
>for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
>port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
>involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
>Metal Gear Solid 3.
>
>Nice try, though, dumbass.

You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.

"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
news:537c7a0b-f40e-4e76-88fc-5888523cb7e0@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> You *do* realize that the game took up every last bit on a 50GB dual-
> layer Blu-Ray disc, right?

That's 275hrs of lossless audio, or the best part of eleven and a half days, 
or 6400 uncompressed high resolution textures. In other words it's lazy 
programming to use that much space, look at what's available on a DVD9 for 
the PC. Unless it's filled with pointless FMV clips that just serve to say 
hay look our 3d engine isn't up to scratch, then a DVD9 will happily fit very 
large very detailed games.

On Jul 18, 6:56 pm, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in messagenews:537c7a0b-f40e-4e76-88fc-5888523cb7e0@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > You *do* realize that the game took up every last bit on a 50GB dual-
> > layer Blu-Ray disc, right?
>
> That's 275hrs of lossless audio, or the best part of eleven and a half days,
> or 6400 uncompressed high resolution textures.

Arbitrary numbers. There is no standard size for one "uncompressed
high resolution texture." How could you know that you can fit 6,400 on
a 50GB BD?

> In other words it's lazy
> programming to use that much space,

What does programming have to do with it? Programming has nothing to
do with audio nor does it have anything to do with art assets. If
you're talking about compressing the data, you're not going to be able
to get the same quality of audio and textures onto a DVD-9 no matter
how good a compression algorithm you use.

Further, the very fact that you have to compress them (which means the
system has to DEcompress them) means you'll be introducing a hit to
performance each and every time a texture appears on screen or some
audio track plays. It's happened with every Xbox 360 and Playstation 3
game that compresses its data.

> look at what's available on a DVD9 for
> the PC.

You mean games that don't have the same quality audio and textures? PC
games tend to look great because of the graphics engine and the far
advanced GPUs. However, you can have crappy models and high quality
textures (or vice versa - crappy textures with a high end graphics
engine).

> Unless it's filled with pointless FMV clips that just serve to say
> hay look our 3d engine isn't up to scratch, then a DVD9 will happily fit very
> large very detailed games.

Yes it will... so long as the game doesn't include lossless audio and
the highest quality textures.

And please don't tell me you're one of the people who think that the
cutscenes in Metal Gear Solid 4 are what's taking up the space on the
BD.

On Jul 18, 6:15 pm, "Michael C"  wrote:
> >"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message
> >news:335cb1c2-8b3e-4122-949b-828afe014881@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
> >for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
> >port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
> >involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
> >Metal Gear Solid 3.
>
> >Nice try, though, dumbass.
>
> You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.

Smug is claiming someone else's statement is bullshit without so much
as a single backing fact.

Any time someone challenges Miss Falcon's skewed idea of reality, he
thinks that he can just say that person is wrong and that everyone
will take his word for it.

Unlike that Xbot douche, I will actually include the facts and figures
I base my statements on there's transparency in my viewpoint, whether
others agree with it or not.

I wasn't out to prove anything (well, except that Jonah's an Xbot
douche, but everyone knew that already).

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:15:25 +0100, "Michael C" 
wrote:

>>"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
>>news:335cb1c2-8b3e-4122-949b-828afe014881@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
>>for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
>>port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
>>involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
>>Metal Gear Solid 3.
>>
>>Nice try, though, dumbass.
>
>You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here. 
>
that he's a smug tit?
-- 

http://bykerblog.wordpress.com/ - My thrilling new blog
XBL Tag: Chrisflynnuk

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:56:55 -0700 (PDT), The alMIGHTY N
 wrote:

>On Jul 18, 6:15 pm, "Michael C"  wrote:
>> >"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message
>> >news:335cb1c2-8b3e-4122-949b-828afe014881@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
>> >for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
>> >port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
>> >involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
>> >Metal Gear Solid 3.
>>
>> >Nice try, though, dumbass.
>>
>> You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.
>
>Smug is claiming someone else's statement is bullshit without so much
>as a single backing fact.
>
>Any time someone challenges Miss Falcon's skewed idea of reality, he
>thinks that he can just say that person is wrong and that everyone
>will take his word for it.
>
>Unlike that Xbot douche, I will actually include the facts and figures
>I base my statements on there's transparency in my viewpoint, whether
>others agree with it or not.
>
>I wasn't out to prove anything (well, except that Jonah's an Xbot
>douche, but everyone knew that already).

is he? i don't see many of his posts, so couldnt comment.

but you did come across like a smug sony fanboy yourself there.
-- 

http://bykerblog.wordpress.com/ - My thrilling new blog
XBL Tag: Chrisflynnuk

"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
news:2a8cbe1f-ef91-47d8-9ea8-1b2ec8e1cf7a@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 18, 6:15 pm, "Michael C"  wrote:
>>
>> >Nice try, though, dumbass.
>>
>> You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.
>
> Smug is claiming someone else's statement is bullshit without so much
> as a single backing fact.

No, that would just be making a statement.

"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
news:6dbde26d-857f-4ccf-99a1-5db591a987f7@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 18, 6:56 pm, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in 
>> messagenews:537c7a0b-f40e-4e76-88fc-5888523cb7e0@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > You *do* realize that the game took up every last bit on a 50GB dual-
>> > layer Blu-Ray disc, right?
>>
>> That's 275hrs of lossless audio, or the best part of eleven and a half 
>> days,
>> or 6400 uncompressed high resolution textures.
>
> Arbitrary numbers. There is no standard size for one "uncompressed
> high resolution texture." How could you know that you can fit 6,400 on
> a 50GB BD?

By creating a standard size (guess what there are such things) high 
resolution 4 channel texture, using the standard lossless compression you can 
expect to half that size.

>
>> In other words it's lazy
>> programming to use that much space,
>
> What does programming have to do with it?

A decent program for rendering losselees compressed textures and audio will 
cut the required file size massivly, add in decent pre-cacheing will reduse 
the need for multiple copys of data on the medium due to slow acces times.

>Programming has nothing to
> do with audio nor does it have anything to do with art assets. If
> you're talking about compressing the data, you're not going to be able
> to get the same quality of audio and textures onto a DVD-9 no matter
> how good a compression algorithm you use.

That's compleately and utterly wrong, the entire point of lossless 
compression is that it's lossless.

> Further, the very fact that you have to compress them (which means the
> system has to DEcompress them) means you'll be introducing a hit to
> performance

Now we get to the heart of why everything is uncompressed and takes up stupid 
amounts of space, either the PS3 doesn't have the grunt to do hardware 
decompression or the programmers were too lazy to write efficient algorithms 
for it.

>> look at what's available on a DVD9 for
>> the PC.
>
> You mean games that don't have the same quality audio and textures?

No I mean ones that have better quality textures and audio, due to having 
decent compression algorithms.

On Jul 19, 7:32 am, Chris F  wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:56:55 -0700 (PDT), The alMIGHTY N
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On Jul 18, 6:15 pm, "Michael C"  wrote:
> >> >"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message
> >> >news:335cb1c2-8b3e-4122-949b-828afe014881@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >And if you're thinking about referencing Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
> >> >for the GameCube, think again. The game, approved by Kojima, was not a
> >> >port of Metal Gear Solid but a remake. Further, Kojima was not
> >> >involved in the project since he and his team were already busy making
> >> >Metal Gear Solid 3.
>
> >> >Nice try, though, dumbass.
>
> >> You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.
>
> >Smug is claiming someone else's statement is bullshit without so much
> >as a single backing fact.
>
> >Any time someone challenges Miss Falcon's skewed idea of reality, he
> >thinks that he can just say that person is wrong and that everyone
> >will take his word for it.
>
> >Unlike that Xbot douche, I will actually include the facts and figures
> >I base my statements on there's transparency in my viewpoint, whether
> >others agree with it or not.
>
> >I wasn't out to prove anything (well, except that Jonah's an Xbot
> >douche, but everyone knew that already).
>
> is he? i don't see many of his posts, so couldnt comment.
>
> but you did come across like a smug sony fanboy yourself there.

So let me get this straight.

If I list out reasons why Kojima wouldn't want to be involved in
porting Metal Gear Solid 4 to the Xbox 360 that don't involve
statements that the Playstation 3 is better in any way or that the
Xbox 360 sucks in any way, I sound like a Sony fanboy?

Even when taken out of the context of all my other posts (which most
people tend to think shows I skew towards the Xbox 360 and get me
called XBOT by PS3 fanboys), nothing in my post indicates a PS3 fanboy
stance.

On Jul 19, 7:45 am, "Michael C"  wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in messagenews:2a8cbe1f-ef91-47d8-9ea8-1b2ec8e1cf7a@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 18, 6:15 pm, "Michael C"  wrote:
>
> >> >Nice try, though, dumbass.
>
> >> You sound bizarrely smug but I don't quite see what you have proven here.
>
> > Smug is claiming someone else's statement is bullshit without so much
> > as a single backing fact.
>
> No, that would just be making a statement.

Yes, a smug statement.

"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
news:82cf18e2-a256-4a3e-9624-df60ee9b759b@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 19, 7:45 am, "Michael C"  wrote:
>>
>> No, that would just be making a statement.
>
> Yes, a smug statement.

Your understanding of the word 'smug' appears to be flawed.

On Jul 18, 6:32 am, The alMIGHTY N  wrote:

> a) People are used to multiple discs for JRPGs.

Not only are people used to multiple discs... time was being a multi-
disc game was a sign of quality.

"Holy crap! Final Fantasy VII is 3 discs?!?! NO WAY! THAT'S AWESOME!"

- Jordan

On Jul 20, 4:21 am, "Michael C"  wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in messagenews:82cf18e2-a256-4a3e-9624-df60ee9b759b@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 19, 7:45 am, "Michael C"  wrote:
>
> >> No, that would just be making a statement.
>
> > Yes, a smug statement.
>
> Your understanding of the word 'smug' appears to be flawed.

Your understanding of Jonah Falcon appears to be flawed - EVERYTHING
from his keyboard is smug.

There is too much swill to even bottom post with so here it is...

Who cares if the 360 can do the game or not?

What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
results could be done with a DVD-9?

Does it really matter?

If the game comes to the 360, then great.

If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.

Even if the game does come out for the PS3, by the time it comes out,
I and many others will have played it to completion and will be
looking for the next great game on either PS3 or 360.

In a way, it's kind of like Bioshock. Everyone was arguing about it a
year ago and now it will come out for PS3. Great news for Sony owners,
but for 360 owners, we don't care as we've already played it.

The arguments are getting old, people. I remember the days when we
used to just have to give Charles Doane a hrad time - but now the
peanut gallery is getting far to big. Why can't we discuss gaming
insttead of arguing about it?

On Jul 22, 5:05 pm, nemala  wrote:
> There is too much swill to even bottom post with so here it is...
>
> Who cares if the 360 can do the game or not?
>
> What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>
> Does it really matter?
>
> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>
> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.
>
> Even if the game does come out for the PS3, by the time it comes out,
> I and many others will have played it to completion and will be
> looking for the next great game on either PS3 or 360.
>
> In a way, it's kind of like Bioshock. Everyone was arguing about it a
> year ago and now it will come out for PS3. Great news for Sony owners,
> but for 360 owners, we don't care as we've already played it.

BioShock is not really a parallel because PS3 fans will have had to
wait 14 months to play the game (unless they also own or had owned a
360) whereas 360 owners will be able to play FFXIII at the same time
as PS3 owners. The only PS3 owners who will be able to play FFXIII
earlier than 360 owners are the ones in Japan (and the ones in North
America and Europe who import the game) since the Western regions will
get the game for both platforms at the same time (in all likelihood).

> The arguments are getting old, people. I remember the days when we
> used to just have to give Charles Doane a hrad time - but now the
> peanut gallery is getting far to big. Why can't we discuss gaming
> insttead of arguing about it?

Because it's fun. ;-)

No, I hear you on that one. The only problem right now is that there
really isn't much to talk about on the gaming front since there aren't
any big releases (and won't be for another few months).

I guess we can talk about Super Mario Bros. or Pac-man or something.

The alMIGHTY N wrote:

> So let me get this straight.
>
> If I list out reasons why Kojima wouldn't want to be involved in
> porting Metal Gear Solid 4 to the Xbox 360 that don't involve
> statements that the Playstation 3 is better in any way or that the
> Xbox 360 sucks in any way, I sound like a Sony fanboy?
>
> Even when taken out of the context of all my other posts (which most
> people tend to think shows I skew towards the Xbox 360 and get me
> called XBOT by PS3 fanboys), nothing in my post indicates a PS3
> fanboy stance.

Apparently if your post doesn't contain fanatical enthusiasm for a 
particular console along with blind hatred for the other you're a fanboi for 
one or the other. You're obviously an Xstation fanboi, so the Wii people 
will be along shortly to excoriate you properly.

-- 
dvus

Michael C wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message
> news:82cf18e2-a256-4a3e-9624-df60ee9b759b@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jul 19, 7:45 am, "Michael C"  wrote:
>>>
>>> No, that would just be making a statement.
>>
>> Yes, a smug statement.
>
> Your understanding of the word 'smug' appears to be flawed.

You gotta be kidding. A posting of "Um, one word: Bullshit." is about as 
smug as it gets, insinuating the poster is in a position to judge the 
referenced post without any supporting facts other than his own "superior" 
knowledge. People can post what they want, but don't cry when someone else 
calls a spade a spade.

-- 
dvus

On Jul 23, 10:34 am, "dvus" <d...@dvenator.com.invalid> wrote:
> The alMIGHTY N wrote:
> > So let me get this straight.
>
> > If I list out reasons why Kojima wouldn't want to be involved in
> > porting Metal Gear Solid 4 to the Xbox 360 that don't involve
> > statements that the Playstation 3 is better in any way or that the
> > Xbox 360 sucks in any way, I sound like a Sony fanboy?
>
> > Even when taken out of the context of all my other posts (which most
> > people tend to think shows I skew towards the Xbox 360 and get me
> > called XBOT by PS3 fanboys), nothing in my post indicates a PS3
> > fanboy stance.
>
> Apparently if your post doesn't contain fanatical enthusiasm for a
> particular console along with blind hatred for the other you're a fanboi for
> one or the other. You're obviously an Xstation fanboi, so the Wii people
> will be along shortly to excoriate you properly.

I'm one of the few people here who actually own all 3 systems and play
(or have played) all of them on a regular basis.

I have tons of games for the Xbox 360 and the Wii. I only have a few
games for the Playstation 3 mainly because most games are cross-
platform and I tend to go with the 360 on those for more options
online.

The only cross-platform game I own for the Playstation 3 is Grand
Theft Auto IV (unless you count Unreal Tournament III, which I don't
since I got it in December when it was still an exclusive).

The alMIGHTY N wrote:
> On Jul 23, 10:34 am, "dvus" <d...@dvenator.com.invalid> wrote:

> > Apparently if your post doesn't contain fanatical enthusiasm for a
> > particular console along with blind hatred for the other you're a
> > fanboi for one or the other. You're obviously an Xstation fanboi,
> > so the Wii people will be along shortly to excoriate you properly.
>
> I'm one of the few people here who actually own all 3 systems and
> play (or have played) all of them on a regular basis.

Ah, so you're a WiXstation fanboi...

> I have tons of games for the Xbox 360 and the Wii. I only have a few
> games for the Playstation 3 mainly because most games are cross-
> platform and I tend to go with the 360 on those for more options
> online.
>
> The only cross-platform game I own for the Playstation 3 is Grand
> Theft Auto IV (unless you count Unreal Tournament III, which I don't
> since I got it in December when it was still an exclusive).

Does that have *any* single player mode at all? (I *really* liked the 
original Unreal, although Unreal2 was a big disappointment.)

-- 
dvus

In microsoft.public.xbox The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
> Let's not forget that most people have a 20GB hard drive (as opposed
> to no hard drive or the 120GB hard drive). That's not even enough
> space to copy the 50GB.

Most PS3 games don't have 50GB of unique files.  Most don't even have 8GB 
of files that are copied repeatedly around the disc to speed up seek time.

Also, I would think the smart way to deal with a game like MGS4 would be 
to copy the game play segments to the hard drive, while using the DVD for 
music and cutscenes.  This is how many PC games operate.  After all, the 
cutscenes will run at their normal speed whether they're on DVD or on a 
hard drive and you only really access them once.

This also allows you split the data into gameplay and movie discs.  This 
is how Diablo II worked, for instance.  You could do a HDD install such 
that the game would be on the hard drive for faster loads.  You would then 
be prompted to insert the movie CD when it came time for a cutscene...or 
after awhile, you just skpped them altogether, so you didn't even need to 
keep the cinematics CD in your drive at all.

-- 
It's not broken.  It's...advanced.

In microsoft.public.xbox Depresion <127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> Further, the very fact that you have to compress them (which means the
>> system has to DEcompress them) means you'll be introducing a hit to
>> performance
> 
> Now we get to the heart of why everything is uncompressed and takes up stupid 
> amounts of space, either the PS3 doesn't have the grunt to do hardware 
> decompression or the programmers were too lazy to write efficient algorithms 
> for it.

I'm sure the PS3 has the power to deal with decompressing a data stream on 
the fly, and there are plenty of highly efficient (for various definitions 
of "efficient" compression schemes out there for this very reason.  After 
all, it's not like this is a new problem.

However, if you've got a stupidly huge amount of storage space, why take 
the hit in performance from compression?  Just put the data, uncompressed, 
onto the disc.

Granted, it's not quite that simple of a trade off.  You also have to 
consider things like seek time and transfer speed.  Using compressed data 
could mean you can put multiple copies of that file on the disc - speeding 
up seek time - while the compressed nature of the file means it'll take 
less time to transfer.

Of course, it seems to me that Sony seems determined to PROVE that today's 
games really need the huge space of blu-ray, and like to hear developers 
brag about how many GB's their titles use up.  Remember the bragging about 
Heavenly Sword containing 30GB of audio data alone?  Then we found out 
that was because they included something like 10 languages on the same 
disc.

And yeah, let's not forget that PCs have been doing >1080p for years now 
with little more than a DVD and a 4-5GB HDD install. 

-- 
It's not broken.  It's...advanced.

In microsoft.public.xbox The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
> a) People are used to multiple discs for JRPGs.
> 
> b) RPGs are much slower paced so a "break" isn't as noticeable.
> 
> c) Blue Dragon was 3 discs. Lost Odyssey was 4 discs. Metal Gear Solid
> 4 for the Xbox 360 would need 6 discs just to match the quality of
> textures and sound of the PS3 version.

You are assuming that all 50GB of the disc is used up by unique files - no 
duplication of data for disc performance purposes, for instance.

You are also assuming that all the data on the disc is already compressed.

-- 
It's not broken.  It's...advanced.

On Jul 19, 7:46 am, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in messagenews:6dbde26d-857f-4ccf-99a1-5db591a987f7@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 18, 6:56 pm, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in
> >> messagenews:537c7a0b-f40e-4e76-88fc-5888523cb7e0@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > You *do* realize that the game took up every last bit on a 50GB dual> >> > layer Blu-Ray disc, right?
>
> >> That's 275hrs of lossless audio, or the best part of eleven and a half
> >> days,
> >> or 6400 uncompressed high resolution textures.
>
> > Arbitrary numbers. There is no standard size for one "uncompressed
> > high resolution texture." How could you know that you can fit 6,400 on
> > a 50GB BD?
>
> By creating a standard size (guess what there are such things) high
> resolution 4 channel texture, using the standard lossless compression you can
> expect to half that size.

Every texture can be of a different size depending on what's in the
file. Part of my job is working with art assets, which are *NEVER*
consistent as far as file size because individual pieces of art can be
so different.

Your number above makes the assumption that every texture will be the
same, which is hardly the case.

> >> In other words it's lazy
> >> programming to use that much space,
>
> > What does programming have to do with it?
>
> A decent program for rendering losselees compressed textures and audio will
> cut the required file size massivly, add in decent pre-cacheing will reduse
> the need for multiple copys of data on the medium due to slow acces timesKojima didn't want to compress the textures or the audio - that's part
of the reason why he stated that his team overestimated the
capabilities of the Playstation 3 and Blu-Ray as a storage medium. He
had to make concessions after they learned that the 50GB Blu-Ray disc
wouldn't be enough to fit everything they wanted.

> >Programming has nothing to
> > do with audio nor does it have anything to do with art assets. If
> > you're talking about compressing the data, you're not going to be able
> > to get the same quality of audio and textures onto a DVD-9 no matter
> > how good a compression algorithm you use.
>
> That's compleately and utterly wrong, the entire point of lossless
> compression is that it's lossless.

Brain fart.

I thought you were trying to say that they would just use compressed
versions of the textures and sound as is.

Again, Kojima didn't want to have to compress the audio or art assets,
thinking that the size of a Blu-Ray disc would allow the team to not
have to degrade performance by incorporating compression algorithms.

> > Further, the very fact that you have to compress them (which means the
> > system has to DEcompress them) means you'll be introducing a hit to
> > performance
>
> Now we get to the heart of why everything is uncompressed and takes up stupid
> amounts of space, either the PS3 doesn't have the grunt to do hardware
> decompression or the programmers were too lazy to write efficient algorithms
> for it.

Kojima already stated that his team misunderstood that capabilities
and limitations of the Playstation 3 when they started the project and
had to adapt during the development process. They thought they
wouldn't have to compress anything.

It has nothing to do with being too lazy with their programming... no
team has ever had the notion of using 50GB worth of space prior to
this generation so it probably was very easy to think they could go
buck wild with everything. It's like when you get your first credit
card... :-)

> >> look at what's available on a DVD9 for
> >> the PC.
>
> > You mean games that don't have the same quality audio and textures?
>
> No I mean ones that have better quality textures and audio, due to having
> decent compression algorithms.

Which games have better quality textures and audio than Metal Gear
Solid 4? MGS4's claim to fame is the insanely high quality of its
textures and audio which I'm sure haven't been matched by PC games
(maybe Crysis?).

On Jul 30, 5:57 pm, Doug Jacobs  wrote:
> In microsoft.public.xbox Depresion <127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> >> Further, the very fact that you have to compress them (which means the
> >> system has to DEcompress them) means you'll be introducing a hit to
> >> performance
>
> > Now we get to the heart of why everything is uncompressed and takes up stupid
> > amounts of space, either the PS3 doesn't have the grunt to do hardware
> > decompression or the programmers were too lazy to write efficient algorithms
> > for it.
>
> I'm sure the PS3 has the power to deal with decompressing a data stream on
> the fly, and there are plenty of highly efficient (for various definitions
> of "efficient" compression schemes out there for this very reason.  After
> all, it's not like this is a new problem.
>
> However, if you've got a stupidly huge amount of storage space, why take
> the hit in performance from compression?  Just put the data, uncompressed,
> onto the disc.
>
> Granted, it's not quite that simple of a trade off.  You also have to
> consider things like seek time and transfer speed.  Using compressed data
> could mean you can put multiple copies of that file on the disc - speeding
> up seek time - while the compressed nature of the file means it'll take
> less time to transfer.
>
> Of course, it seems to me that Sony seems determined to PROVE that today's
> games really need the huge space of blu-ray, and like to hear developers
> brag about how many GB's their titles use up.  Remember the bragging about
> Heavenly Sword containing 30GB of audio data alone?  Then we found out
> that was because they included something like 10 languages on the same
> disc.
>
> And yeah, let's not forget that PCs have been doing >1080p for years now
> with little more than a DVD and a 4-5GB HDD install.

Which games have textures and audio that are of higher quality than
Metal Gear Solid 4?

I'm truly curious about this as the games I've played didn't look like
they had mindblowing textures. Granted, I haven't played any of the
latest PC games although I did see Crysis, which looked good, but more
because of the quality of the graphics engine rather than the quality
of the textures.

On Jul 30, 6:02 pm, Doug Jacobs  wrote:
> In microsoft.public.xbox The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
>
> > a) People are used to multiple discs for JRPGs.
>
> > b) RPGs are much slower paced so a "break" isn't as noticeable.
>
> > c) Blue Dragon was 3 discs. Lost Odyssey was 4 discs. Metal Gear Solid
> > 4 for the Xbox 360 would need 6 discs just to match the quality of
> > textures and sound of the PS3 version.
>
> You are assuming that all 50GB of the disc is used up by unique files - no
> duplication of data for disc performance purposes, for instance.

I'm quite positive that very little, if any, data duplication was done
for MGS4. Kojima was very expressive about how the storage size (not
the speed) of Blu-Ray was just not enough to do what he wanted to do.

> You are also assuming that all the data on the disc is already compressedNo, I am assuming that they DIDN'T compress anything since Kojima was
against doing that. If whatever team handled the 360 port decided to
compress everything and take the performance hit, I'm sure you could
fit the game on a smaller number of discs.

"nemala"  wrote in message 
news:5ad038bd-e67c-4a0c-949b-c3a119b5d7f3@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>
> Does it really matter?

Yes.

> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>
> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.

Do you game on it, or is it like mine little more than a fancy blu-ay player?

"Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message 
news:l72dnZQnV5HNqAbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>
> "nemala"  wrote in message 
> news:5ad038bd-e67c-4a0c-949b-c3a119b5d7f3@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
>> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>>
>> Does it really matter?
>
> Yes.
>
>> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>>
>> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.
>
> Do you game on it, or is it like mine little more than a fancy blu-ay 
> player?
>
I'm really not a fan of Blu-Ray and since the PS3 lacks a built-in IR port, 
why buy a PS3?  Because really, like you said it's really nothing more then 
a fancy Blu-Ray player.   I have the money to buy a bunch of PS3's if I 
wanted, but there's not 1 thing on the PS3 that is a must have.  I've played 
the PS3 at the store, I'm really not impressed and also afraid I'll twist 
the controller in two after a while of game play.   Hey, maybe HOME will be 
done shortly before the PS4 release!!!  Not that I care, it seems silly and 
a huge waste of time.  Seems pretty boring, but then anything NEW is better 
then nothing at all I guess.  If you just hate MS for whatever reason and 
would never buy a Xbox, fine by me, go buy yourself a PS2.  Lots of great 
exclusive games, the console is cheap, the games are cheap, it's still 
supported, and can still buy new.   Hell it's still selling like crazy. 
Skip the PS3, and maybe go with the PS4.  Maybe Sony will get it right the 
next time.

Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at.  Royalties of Blu-Ray 
players and movies.  Far more money in that then selling games.  Which is 
why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR.   Sony is tired of paying 
Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!  Of course 
Blu-Ray needs to win over the DVD crowd.  Remember what Sony said before the 
PS3 was even released.  That people would buy the PS3 even if there wasn't 
any games for it.   Ya, Cheap Blu-Ray movie player.  Everything else has 
been slow in coming.  Sony cared more about Blu-Ray then holding onto all 
the game Exclusives it USED to have.  The list is long and growing.

On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:
> "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>
> news:l72dnZQnV5HNqAbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "nemala"  wrote in message
> >news:5ad038bd-e67c-4a0c-949b-c3a119b5d7f3@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com..> >>What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
> >> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>
> >> Does it really matter?
>
> > Yes.
>
> >> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>
> >> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.
>
> > Do you game on it, or is it like mine little more than a fancy blu-ay
> > player?
>
> I'm really not a fan of Blu-Ray and since the PS3 lacks a built-in IR port,
> why buy a PS3?  Because really, like you said it's really nothing more then
> a fancy Blu-Ray player.

This is true only if you're not a fan of the exclusives. The system is
certainly much more than a fancy Blu-Ray player for gamers who enjoy
Metal Gear Solid, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo, etc. SOCOM will be
coming soon and God of War should arrive next year.

If you could only choose one system and a) you didn't care about Blu-
Ray, b) the exclusives aren't must-haves for you and c) you want to
enjoy the widest selection of quality games, then obviously you go
with an Xbox 360.

However, if you are interested in Blu-Ray and you're a big fan of at
least a couple of those franchises, you can't really go wrong with a
Playstation 3.

> I have the money to buy a bunch of PS3's if I
> wanted, but there's not 1 thing on the PS3 that is a must have.  I've played
> the PS3 at the store, I'm really not impressed and also afraid I'll twist
> the controller in two after a while of game play.

The Dual Shock controller is heftier and feels a bit sturdier.
However, if you're the type of gamer who regular takes out their
frustration on their controller, then you have other problems to worry
about.

> Hey, maybe HOME will be
> done shortly before the PS4 release!!!  Not that I care, it seems silly and
> a huge waste of time.

No argument there. The PS3 fanboys keep harping about it but I think
it's much ado about nothing. I have zero confidence that Home will be
anything but a major flop.

> Seems pretty boring, but then anything NEW is better
> then nothing at all I guess.  If you just hate MS for whatever reason and
> would never buy a Xbox, fine by me, go buy yourself a PS2.

I picked up a Playstation 2 when it was on sale at my local Shoprite
but have yet to open it. I feel I have to at least clear some of the
games on my current generation systems first.

Also, it's tough to find new games that I'm interested in. I can pick
up the two God of War games and Kingdom Hearts II brand new for $19.99
if I want but games like Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3,
Kingdom Hearts, Siren, and Fatal Frame require that I scour eBay or
buy *ugh* used.

> Lots of great
> exclusive games, the console is cheap, the games are cheap, it's still
> supported, and can still buy new.   Hell it's still selling like crazy.
> Skip the PS3, and maybe go with the PS4.  Maybe Sony will get it right the
> next time.
>
> Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at.  Royalties of Blu-Ray
> players and movies.  Far more money in that then selling games.  Which is
> why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR.   Sony is tired of paying
> Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!  Of course
> Blu-Ray needs to win over the DVD crowd.  Remember what Sony said before the
> PS3 was even released.  That people would buy the PS3 even if there wasn't
> any games for it.   Ya, Cheap Blu-Ray movie player.  Everything else has
> been slow in coming.  Sony cared more about Blu-Ray then holding onto all
> the game Exclusives it USED to have.  The list is long and growing.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:

<snip>

> Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at.  Royalties of Blu-Ray
> players and movies.  Far more money in that then selling games.

That's only true if Blu-Ray is able to really take off and give DVD a
run for its money. Right now, Sony isn't making that much money off
their investment.

> Which is
> why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR.   Sony is tired of paying
> Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!

How so?

Toshiba doesn't make any devices that require Blu-Ray drives (and thus
require them to pay royalties to Sony).

I don't think Toshiba has made any announcements about delving into
the Blu-Ray realm. They're probably still smarting from earlier this
year. Last I heard, they specifically said they would focus on
upscaling DVD players for a while.

<snip>

"The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in message 
news:b94c8669-7adf-4215-b3af-52c9144afc00@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:

<snip>

> Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at. Royalties of Blu-Ray
> players and movies. Far more money in that then selling games.

That's only true if Blu-Ray is able to really take off and give DVD a
run for its money. Right now, Sony isn't making that much money off
their investment.

> Which is
> why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR. Sony is tired of paying
> Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!

How so?

Toshiba doesn't make any devices that require Blu-Ray drives (and thus
require them to pay royalties to Sony).

I don't think Toshiba has made any announcements about delving into
the Blu-Ray realm. They're probably still smarting from earlier this
year. Last I heard, they specifically said they would focus on
upscaling DVD players for a while.

<snip>

Toshiba doesn't currently make any Blu-Ray drives YET, if anything, they're 
going out of the way to make DVD even better.  From what I read, working on 
adding HDi from HD DVD to the DVD format, to some type of Super Upconverting 
which scans so many frames to get a much better Upconvert because no 2 
frames are just alike so you can fill in some of the missing Data and get a 
better picture.  Still at some point Toshiba will have to start making 
Blu-Ray players. Unless is fails!  They may wait until they can be sold in 
the $199 price range for a Profile 2.0 player.   When that day comes, 
Toshiba will be paying Sony.  Here's a few links on the subject.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9884497-7.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20080531225807_Toshiba_Intends_to_Sell_Super_Upconversion_DVD_Players.html

On Aug 8, 11:05 am, The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
> On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>
> >news:l72dnZQnV5HNqAbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>
> > > "nemala"  wrote in message
> > >news:5ad038bd-e67c-4a0c-949b-c3a119b5d7f3@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> > >>What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
> > >> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>
> > >> Does it really matter?
>
> > > Yes.
>
> > >> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>
> > >> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.
>
> > > Do you game on it, or is it like mine little more than a fancy blu-ay
> > > player?
>
> > I'm really not a fan of Blu-Ray and since the PS3 lacks a built-in IR port,
> > why buy a PS3?  Because really, like you said it's really nothing more then
> > a fancy Blu-Ray player.
>
> This is true only if you're not a fan of the exclusives. The system is
> certainly much more than a fancy Blu-Ray player for gamers who enjoy
> Metal Gear Solid, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo, etc. SOCOM will be
> coming soon and God of War should arrive next year.
>
> If you could only choose one system and a) you didn't care about Blu-
> Ray, b) the exclusives aren't must-haves for you and c) you want to
> enjoy the widest selection of quality games, then obviously you go
> with an Xbox 360.
>
> However, if you are interested in Blu-Ray and you're a big fan of at
> least a couple of those franchises, you can't really go wrong with a
> Playstation 3.
>
> > I have the money to buy a bunch of PS3's if I
> > wanted, but there's not 1 thing on the PS3 that is a must have.  I've played
> > the PS3 at the store, I'm really not impressed and also afraid I'll twist
> > the controller in two after a while of game play.
>
> The Dual Shock controller is heftier and feels a bit sturdier.
> However, if you're the type of gamer who regular takes out their
> frustration on their controller, then you have other problems to worry
> about.
>
> > Hey, maybe HOME will be
> > done shortly before the PS4 release!!!  Not that I care, it seems silly and
> > a huge waste of time.
>
> No argument there. The PS3 fanboys keep harping about it but I think
> it's much ado about nothing. I have zero confidence that Home will be
> anything but a major flop.
>
> > Seems pretty boring, but then anything NEW is better
> > then nothing at all I guess.  If you just hate MS for whatever reason and
> > would never buy a Xbox, fine by me, go buy yourself a PS2.
>
> I picked up a Playstation 2 when it was on sale at my local Shoprite
> but have yet to open it. I feel I have to at least clear some of the
> games on my current generation systems first.
>
> Also, it's tough to find new games that I'm interested in. I can pick
> up the two God of War games and Kingdom Hearts II brand new for $19.99
> if I want but games like Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3,
> Kingdom Hearts, Siren, and Fatal Frame require that I scour eBay or
> buy *ugh* used.
>
>

Nothing wrong with buying games used.  Leaves more money for
jaegerbombs, muscle milk, and new haircuts.  "Not now, chief, I'm in
the f***ing zone."



>
> > Lots of great
> > exclusive games, the console is cheap, the games are cheap, it's still
> > supported, and can still buy new.   Hell it's still selling like crazy.
> > Skip the PS3, and maybe go with the PS4.  Maybe Sony will get it right the
> > next time.
>
> > Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at.  Royalties of Blu-Ray
> > players and movies.  Far more money in that then selling games.  Which is
> > why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR.   Sony is tired of paying
> > Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!  Of course
> > Blu-Ray needs to win over the DVD crowd.  Remember what Sony said before the
> > PS3 was even released.  That people would buy the PS3 even if there wasn't
> > any games for it.   Ya, Cheap Blu-Ray movie player.  Everything else has
> > been slow in coming.  Sony cared more about Blu-Ray then holding onto all
> > the game Exclusives it USED to have.  The list is long and growing.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Aug 8, 10:55 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr."  wrote:
> On Aug 8, 11:05 am, The alMIGHTY N  wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:
>
> > > "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>
> > >news:l72dnZQnV5HNqAbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>
> > > > "nemala"  wrote in message
> > > >news:5ad038bd-e67c-4a0c-949b-c3a119b5d7f3@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > >>What difference does it make if you have lazy programming and the same
> > > >> results could be done with a DVD-9?
>
> > > >> Does it really matter?
>
> > > > Yes.
>
> > > >> If the game comes to the 360, then great.
>
> > > >> If it doesn't, buy a PS3 - I did.
>
> > > > Do you game on it, or is it like mine little more than a fancy blu-ay
> > > > player?
>
> > > I'm really not a fan of Blu-Ray and since the PS3 lacks a built-in IR port,
> > > why buy a PS3?  Because really, like you said it's really nothing more then
> > > a fancy Blu-Ray player.
>
> > This is true only if you're not a fan of the exclusives. The system is
> > certainly much more than a fancy Blu-Ray player for gamers who enjoy
> > Metal Gear Solid, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo, etc. SOCOM will be
> > coming soon and God of War should arrive next year.
>
> > If you could only choose one system and a) you didn't care about Blu-
> > Ray, b) the exclusives aren't must-haves for you and c) you want to
> > enjoy the widest selection of quality games, then obviously you go
> > with an Xbox 360.
>
> > However, if you are interested in Blu-Ray and you're a big fan of at
> > least a couple of those franchises, you can't really go wrong with a
> > Playstation 3.
>
> > > I have the money to buy a bunch of PS3's if I
> > > wanted, but there's not 1 thing on the PS3 that is a must have.  I've played
> > > the PS3 at the store, I'm really not impressed and also afraid I'll twist
> > > the controller in two after a while of game play.
>
> > The Dual Shock controller is heftier and feels a bit sturdier.
> > However, if you're the type of gamer who regular takes out their
> > frustration on their controller, then you have other problems to worry
> > about.
>
> > > Hey, maybe HOME will be
> > > done shortly before the PS4 release!!!  Not that I care, it seems silly and
> > > a huge waste of time.
>
> > No argument there. The PS3 fanboys keep harping about it but I think
> > it's much ado about nothing. I have zero confidence that Home will be
> > anything but a major flop.
>
> > > Seems pretty boring, but then anything NEW is better
> > > then nothing at all I guess.  If you just hate MS for whatever reason and
> > > would never buy a Xbox, fine by me, go buy yourself a PS2.
>
> > I picked up a Playstation 2 when it was on sale at my local Shoprite
> > but have yet to open it. I feel I have to at least clear some of the
> > games on my current generation systems first.
>
> > Also, it's tough to find new games that I'm interested in. I can pick
> > up the two God of War games and Kingdom Hearts II brand new for $19.99
> > if I want but games like Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3,
> > Kingdom Hearts, Siren, and Fatal Frame require that I scour eBay or
> > buy *ugh* used.
>
> Nothing wrong with buying games used.  Leaves more money for
> jaegerbombs, muscle milk, and new haircuts.  "Not now, chief, I'm in
> the f***ing zone."

I don't have a problem with the used games market in general but I
personally wouldn't want to buy a used game from one of the retail
stores. I've bought one or two from eBay from people who have high
ratings and specifically state that the games are in mint condition
with no scratches, no damage to the case or manual, etc. Retail
stores' used games are always in shoddy condition.

On Aug 8, 10:54 pm, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:
> "The alMIGHTY N"  wrote in messagenews:b94c8669-7adf-4215-b3af-52c9144afc00@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 8, 2:38 am, "JBDragon" <JBDragon at someplace dot com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Blu-Ray is where the real money to be made is at. Royalties of Blu-Ray
> > players and movies. Far more money in that then selling games.
>
> That's only true if Blu-Ray is able to really take off and give DVD a
> run for its money. Right now, Sony isn't making that much money off
> their investment.
>
> > Which is
> > why there was the whole HD DVD/Blu-Ray WAR. Sony is tired of paying
> > Royalties to Toshiba for DVD, now it's the other way around!
>
> How so?
>
> Toshiba doesn't make any devices that require Blu-Ray drives (and thus
> require them to pay royalties to Sony).
>
> I don't think Toshiba has made any announcements about delving into
> the Blu-Ray realm. They're probably still smarting from earlier this
> year. Last I heard, they specifically said they would focus on
> upscaling DVD players for a while.
>
> <snip>
>
> Toshiba doesn't currently make any Blu-Ray drives YET, if anything, they're
> going out of the way to make DVD even better.  From what I read, working on
> adding HDi from HD DVD to the DVD format, to some type of Super Upconverting
> which scans so many frames to get a much better Upconvert because no 2
> frames are just alike so you can fill in some of the missing Data and get a
> better picture.  Still at some point Toshiba will have to start making
> Blu-Ray players. Unless is fails!  They may wait until they can be sold in
> the $199 price range for a Profile 2.0 player.   When that day comes,
> Toshiba will be paying Sony.  Here's a few links on the subject.http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9884497-7.html
>
> http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20080531225807_Toshib...

I don't doubt that but I'm talking about right now. There's a very
real possibility that it will never come to that.