Oblivion....For the PS3?!?!?! Plus, seasonly RPG news!

Harshboy · Post by **Harshboy** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 9:16 am

O snap, Ben posted in this thread

Anyway, i totally agree with him. Why spend the extra 200 bucks to buy some worthless Piece of Black Plastic?

Nintendo and M$ ftw!

Post by **CronoTriggerfan** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:06 am

benheck wrote:Graphics smaphics... Why play it on a $600 system when it can run on a $400 one?

This will be the first "litmus test" of how cross-platforming will hurt the PS3.

People like good graphics, but I don't think SLIGHTLY better ones will convince them to spend $200 more.

-Ben

I agree. I mean, look at the Xbox and the PS2. One may have a bit better hardware/graphics, but the designer support is all for the PS2. The only thing that's been keeping my hope for the PS3 was Square-Enix, but now they said that multi-platforming is in the cards; if Namco does the same, then no PS3 for me...EVER!

CTFan

jones · Post by **jones** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:14 am

Here's the scoop on this from Gamespot.com.

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/rpg/theelde ... id=6158895

Sounds like there will be graphical and gameplay "enhancements" (whatever that means). The only item of note I see is that there will be a new race added (The Knights of the Nine), but that's hardly something worth plunking down an extra $200 on a system for.

I've got Oblivion for 360 and I've only used 2 of the races so far! Adding one more isn't adding much incentive...

Krepticor · Post by **Krepticor** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:11 am

This is where I deviate from the Group...

I Believe in the $600 for the PS3 based on the inflation making it the same in comparison to the Atari VCS and I also am a firm believer in Pop Culture, no matter what you say the people who say that they want a PS3 are the popular ares of society, and that is the driving force in the economy, not performance (even thought the PS3 is better) Look at the Dreamcast, It totally Rocked in performance, and was cheaper than the PS2 but the PS2 still killed the Dreamcast...

I hate to say It but I know more people who are looking foward for the release of the PS3 than those that own an XBOX360

sorry...

teraflop122 · Post by **teraflop122** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:59 pm

You just contradicted yourself. You said performance wasn't a selling point, but rather pop culture was. However, you than went on to site an example in which the dreamcast was overthrown by a system with superior hardware.

I do partially agree, though. The majority of developers were already 'in' with Sony from the PS1 era, so they natural followed Sony over to the PS2. I'm not so sure they'll do the same during this generation, because the industry seems to have become more dynamic, and Sony's position is no longer very strong.

totokan · Post by **totokan** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:11 pm

teraflop, the boxing game was fight night round 3. Also, this is no reason to get a ps3, and there never will be.

Post by **CronoTriggerfan** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:16 pm

teraflop122 wrote:I do partially agree, though. The majority of developers were already 'in' with Sony from the PS1 era, so they natural followed Sony over to the PS2. I'm not so sure they'll do the same during this generation, because the industry seems to have become more dynamic, and Sony's position is no longer very strong.

Exactly. Take Square-Enix for example. They recently announced that they will no longer be a Sony-exclusive console. If your main cash cow leaves you, you know something's up.

And Totokan, that's a huge matter of opinion. There's bound to be some point of interest at some point in a console's lifetime that makes you say, "Damn, I wish I had a 'this console' to play 'that one game' right about now". I was a PS2 owner this time around, but when games like the Halo series for the Xbox and Zelda for the Gamecube came out, I definitely had wished I had those consoles for at least a little while to play those games. So be more open-minded about the next-gen.

CTFan

totokan · Post by **totokan** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:33 pm

CronoTriggerfan wrote:
teraflop122 wrote:I do partially agree, though. The majority of developers were already 'in' with Sony from the PS1 era, so they natural followed Sony over to the PS2. I'm not so sure they'll do the same during this generation, because the industry seems to have become more dynamic, and Sony's position is no longer very strong.
Exactly. Take Square-Enix for example. They recently announced that they will no longer be a Sony-exclusive console. If your main cash cow leaves you, you know something's up.

And Totokan, that's a huge matter of opinion. There's bound to be some point of interest at some point in a console's lifetime that makes you say, "Damn, I wish I had a 'this console' to play 'that one game' right about now". I was a PS2 owner this time around, but when games like the Halo series for the Xbox and Zelda for the Gamecube came out, I definitely had wished I had those consoles for at least a little while to play those games. So be more open-minded about the next-gen.

CTFan

I am (err... WAS), but there is no longer a single -GOOD- exclusive title on the ps3, except possibly KH3, but I just got the first one.

Post by **bicostp** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:26 pm

Harshboy wrote:O snap, Ben posted in this thread Anyway, i totally agree with him. Why spend the extra 200 bucks to buy some worthless Piece of Black Plastic?

Nintendo and M$ ftw!

Why spend $300 (ish) for what is essentially a Gamecube with a fancy controller?

Playstation 1 > Gamecube

atari2600a · Post by **atari2600a** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:27 am

I believe you made some typos in your post. Here, I've fixed them:

bicostp wrote:Why spend $300 (ish) for what is essentially a PS3-killer with a k!ck-@$$ controller?

Playstation 3 < Gamecube