Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Jasio, 9 Dec 2012.
I hope that light is not the only tracking reference they are using. The PS Move does not work in my environment as the projector combined with the dark room plays havoc with it - I would hate for this to be the same - it would in fact rule out the system altogether.
Kinect doesn't work either for the same reason.
Having said this, I have not missed having Move or Kinect as there have not been any games that make serious use of either!
I don't like the look of that controller at all! It's like the original PS3 controller had sexual intercourse with the Wii U Pro controller.
I really do hope it's not the final design!
Now there's a feature no-one has predicted yet!
But IMO this does look a lot like a mix from the PS3 Controller and the Wii-U Pro controller. Nothing wrong with the PS3 controller, but the Wii-U Pro controller is utterly disgusting IMHO.
Dev tool kits never have final designs on the controller. This is probably 1 of several that have been passed around for testing.
The WiiU controller is actually comfortable. Everyone says it, despite the controller looks.
You're right - it shouldn't be, but it is!
From the D-pad design I doubt it's the final build; as far as I can remember every Playstation controller (even god awful PS3 boomerang) has had separated D-pad buttons.
I do not like that.
Bad news, the PS4 will not be able to play PS3 games.
You must stream your game with Sony service (this means you'll probably will have to rebuy your game, as how is it suppose to know that you have the game already?). And if you live in Countries like Canada where you have small bandwidth quotas, then you are screwed, if you don't want the 2 consoles eating space.
This is from Wall Street Journal
Also more leaked detail emerges, that the touchscreen, is single touch, resistive touch screen.
This isn't too bad (except of course for the bandwidth issue) - in the past when I have upgraded, I rarely want to play the old games anyway. I would have thought also that any purchases made through PSN or PSN+ will be OK.
Backwards compatibility has always been problematic and it never really worked that well.
The streaming/bandwidth issue is contentious though. I am lucky in that I have a 100Mb connection, however I am data throttled at certain parts of the day with Virgin Media. If streaming is the way things are going then the ISPs need to pull their fingers out and start providing fast and truly unlimited services. One presumes that Sony have done their sums (and their research) and they reckon that there is a good enough broadband service to meet there unit sales targets. Either that or they are going to start laying cable!!
Backwards compatibility always worked above and beyond for Nintendo.. it's Microsoft and Sony that don't give 2 crap, about it. It's always a half ass job which they give up soon after.
Sony doesn't care, it's not their problem. It looks like an up side on the box, and that is all. Why do you think that onLive never picked up? Despite the low monthly fees. It's because the experience is very so-so unless you are very lucky and live in a ISP competitive environment, or uber rich to afford the fanciest of plan.
Your ISP is super hype about it! I mean look at all the data amount you'll pass per month from your bandwidth and they can overcharge you on it. Sure you can alleviate the pain, by taking the more expensive service, in any case, ISP wins big! And if you are unlimited now.. expect to be like in the u>S where they added bandwidth limit, and slowly shrinking it, matching Canada's super limited monthly plans (30GB per month for 60$ anyone? (just internet))
..Surely it'd just be easier to keep a PS3 slim to hand for those moments of nostalgia?
I'm lucky, in a way, because I can't sell mine - No one seems to want an ASBO orange PS3
In the short term the ISPs will gain, but eventually either their networks will collapse under the strain or people will stop using the services. This is going to be a big issues for all the streaming services. ISPs are already trying to get services like iTunes to contribute to their infrastructure costs, which at the moment Google are resisting. Once Sony and Microsoft start streaming games, then the ISPs are going to get really tough. They will increase their costs and reduce bandwidth limits to try and get the service owners to contribute. Basically something has to give somewhere.
Personally although I think that streaming is the way things are going to go, I think it may be a little too early to only rely on this distribution method. If the service providers want to roll this out now then they are going to have to contribute to improving the infrastructure. If they don't then they are building a house of cards...
One report on the internet doesn't make it a fact that Galkai is going to be the only way to play older games. As others have said, the issues around ISPs are very real ones, which can massively harm the service in certain regions.
I'm going to wait until the 20th, as at this point, rumours are going to end up being a lot of nonsense.
Don't personally expect ps4 or xbox720 to be backwards compatible.
Both are moving from power pc to x86 pretty major change in architecture for both.
Nor do I truly care rarely get the urge to play last gen games.
Bigger issue for both is online play if the latest FIFA launches before both consoles will be a major hold up on new console sales.
PPC to x86 emulation isn't hard - Apple did it with Rosetta back in 2006 with very acceptable results - and that was with Core Duo CPUs, not our current ones.
Basically, emulation would be possible, via software. I doubt there will be hardware emulation though, as that is an expensive method of doing things.
Emulation isn't hard or even very hardware intensive. (it is more intensive, naturally, but the new console is faster). The reason why it is the case on PC emulators, is that no one really knows how the console it emulates really works. There is a lot of assumptions and guesses, and workarounds, which leads to poor performance, and graphical or/and gaming glitches.
Not to mention it's costly to implement and is likely to bite them in the arse when certain games don't work. Also you can bet that the major publishers will be lobbying for backwards compatibility NOT to be included - it suits them as they can release 'HD' versions of their old games and also it doesn't take sales away from the new line-ups. Nintendo could get away with this as they mostly self publish (or at least have strict licensing deals).
Separate names with a comma.