PS4 Discussion

[K0rN_b4LL]

I think all the mud there is to sling has been slung already so I'll just go with the funnies-

 

[Marginal]

Onto real discussion:

-Since it has been stated over and again that the PS4 will require PS+ for online multiplayer*. What happens to the PS3 and the Vita? Do these devices require the use of PS+ to play online multiplayer.

They will remain as is. The pay online is only for PS4.

Though if you have a Vita and a PS3, PS+ is an excellent deal just for the instant game collection alone. It paid for itself within a month given the games I got for freeish that I otherwise would've purchased.

Also, if anyone here actually went to E3, if so, how different does the PS3 controller feel from the PS4 controller? The PS4 controller looks like slightly elongated (from footage in videos), reminiscent of the infamous "boomerang controller prototype" of the early PS3.

I'm not at e3, but the grips are longer. The L2 and R2 buttons are now more trigger shaped too.

 

[Ishimaru Jinrai]

economy wise goes in video game industries, any game will coast money but not guarantees of return, is not the best interest to them simply block used games because one time players won't buy something and hate it, games are basically gamble if you don't play your cards right it is for no use.

1: Used game buyers don't give developers any revenue, hence they bought it used, not NEW. Assuming they buy DLC or season passes, which most people just complain about anyways.

2: One time buyers buy the game day 1, beat it, then resell it a week later. So now there isn't much point to buy the game new for $60 when you can buy a used one for only $50. The developer just got screwed.

3: Games are not completely gambles. A game's success is almost always dependent on how competent their marketing department is. TV commercials, Youtube ads, gamefaqs ads, etc.

4: Developers don't have a Hell Gate from which they can pull infinite supplies of money! They need profits.

 

[ZeroBeat]

Games are definitely gambles if they don't have an established fan base. CoD is going to sell because its CoD. You can market the game all you want to but at the end of the day the game has to be good, and if a game sucks why do i have to pay full price for it?

 

[Ishimaru Jinrai]

Games are definitely gambles if they don't have an established fan base. CoD is going to sell because its CoD. You can market the game all you want to but at the end of the day the game has to be good, and if a game sucks why do i have to pay full price for it?

Yea your exactly right about new IPs being a big gamble. Either the new fans will love it, or hate it. But usually it's how hyped you can get them, like "BOOM! This new game! Footage of monsters in cutscenes! Multiplayer! Epic story line! Coming March 2014! Pre-order and get the Mind Exploder Rail Gun!"

Then it will be successful, but if you make something new like Fuse / Overstrike, and don't advertise it, it sells like crap, like it did. As sad as that is, I see good 3rd party games and JP games get bashed on all the time.