Sony's Geometry Wars (and other e-Distributed titles) leaked

lol

u guys are funny. i am telling u the one handfull of features that i enjoy using on live and could not go with out and ur telling me they might add, like i said 6 months ago if they don't have those features no biggie and not me many live users feel the same way. Its my decision and opinion as i stated in my last post. with out that feature i am done. and its more than 5 mins. i have close friends and relatives i voice chat with or message with while i play. i should not have to wait. and its more than waiting, what if by time i get out of my game my friend is already in his becasue he figured i was to buys to reply or what ever. its an incovience.

and yes 14 cents a day is worth it. i pay much more just for my local phoneservice. i also msoke a pack and a half of ciggs a day. at 20 cents a cigg. live is very inexpensive part of my life and adds hours of enjoyment and connectivity to it.

these are additions not found on xbox's live and to me are realy next gen ways to game. i am sorry if u feel diff. the fact is out the box that feature is not present on the ps3. when it is i will than i will consider a ps3.

do u see what i am saying. was not bashing the ps3 or sony just saying right now the 360 meets my needs and exceeds them. if u donlt understand that than some of you are fanboys. i am not going out to purchase a system i feel singles out my gaming just cause it might have this feature down the road. does it have it now NO. So i am not happy. i was first getting a ps3 for assains creed than figured well i will get it for mgs4 and had all intentions to do so as i figured this form of connectivity would be included. yes its a deal breaker for me. not to mention the no rumble.

sorry right now the ps3 does not appeal to my LIFESTYLE.

once again till it does, like they said they might include it at a later date, i will not be getting one. and will be the first time i have not gotten a ps game system at launch. Yes ia m upest at sony over this and many things. yes the ps3 looks like a good machine. notice how i give it its dues but like i said does it fit my liefstyle right now? NO. And thats my decision and opinion based off facts. not fanboy bs. just the facts.

hope some of you understand.

Blast Factor looks more like Mutant Storm than Geometry Wars

"6. sony FTW as usual. if only nintendo and microsux could follow a great company like sony.
oh guess they gonna have to learn the hardway when the lose again this gen lol"

By "follow" you mean blatantly rip off right?

holy crap, azn_1080p now has fanboys.

Speaks like a true visionary? Wow. If visionary means praising every last thing that sony does then there are alot of visionary people in this world.

None the less, Sony really has now shown that they are completely incapable of coming up with any original idea when it comes to designing a console.

This just reminds me of the comment one of the sony big wigs made (either Kutaragi or Kaz) in which they said "we don't really care about our competition".

With that said, I think we all knew this was coming anyways. Sony has said all along that they'd have downloadable games as well. I just find it funny that people are getting excited about playing retro style arcade games in 1080p. Also, I'll still take XBLA with Symphony of the Night, Castle Crashers, and Small Arms coming. I never thought I'd be excited about XBLA titles, but MS is going a good job of keeping desireable games coming to the service.

I can't help but feel people are taking this 'free' part of the service a little bit too literally.

What the article a few days ago said was the actual service would be free, but:
"the only things you'll pay money for are paid-for downloadable content, or subscriptions to premium services like massively multiplayer games."

How massively multiplayer games are defined, we don't yet know. One would imagine the likes of Halo would be included and it could be that the majority of PS3 games online modes will require a subscription service. Sony have to profit from the service somewhere, we should never forget that is their ultimate goal.

In this sense, the 360 and PS3 become more alike then people realise.
The 360 already has silver membership. Which is -free- and grants access to the Xbox Live marketplace and the vast majority of its content. Just about the only thing you need Gold for is to play 360 titles online.

And for all we know so far, the PS3 could in reality be a very similar situation.
From this point if view, it could well be that a dedicated online gamer will find the Xbox Live gold service cheaper than paying subscriptions to multiple games. Even just three or four.
Infact, I bet it will.

Yes, the PS3 has a web browser. But so did the Dreamcast. Unlike the PSP, the PS3 isn't portable. Would you really perfer to surf the web via PS3 instead of PC? Is it really that big a practical point? You can do that right now by plugging your PC into your HD TV.
Its nice but not really something to cheer about.
Its all added up in that higher initial price.

Sony will give you something comparable to everything that MS and Nin do. You just have to wait an extra year or so for developers to imitate whatever is out there. This will continue after the PS3 is out. Nintendogs -- Sony dogs. Geometry Wars -- Blast factor. Halo -- RFoM. GoW -- ???

If you have a little extra cash and a lot of patience, Sony is the way to go.

Ok guys listen, PS3 is going to be a great machine indeed. A 600$ great machine. People have already made note of the fact that an average console's life span is 4 years, and a 4 year subscription to XBox Live is 200$, which is the price difference between the 360 and the PS3. That takes care of the cost factor. As for functionality, the PS3 will inevitably be awesome, but when the majority of gamers go to Wal-Mart to pick up a system, they look at Price, game library, game price, and system applications. Fanboys of all three systems will undoubtedly stick with their favorite. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo all have online programs with free and non-free downloadable content, so Sony isn't revolutionizing or perfecting anything there. As for game prices, Sony's president Ken Kutaragi was quoted in Game Informer magazine as saying "If they're higher than $59.99, don't knock me, but I don't expect them to reach $100." So yeah, enjoy that. As for the functionality of the Blue-Ray disk, the options seem to be limitless. That is, if game developers used those options. See people in game companies have found out about this thing called money, and they're partial to it. They enjoy it so much in fact that aside from a few big name developers, they make their game title for all three consoles. Now, the Wii aside, the 360 has acquired almost all of Sony's previously "excusive titles". This also raises an interesting point. Take Assassin's Creed for example, and let's suppose when that title was a Sony exclusive, that they were showing us just how much the Blue Ray could do. Awesome right? But oh no, look out, here comes the 360 with the entire full game of Assassin's creed on a regular DVD disk? It makes me wonder why someone would develop a game console with software that isn't being used by developers. Lets look at the PS3's hardware capabilities. It is amazing, and has been touted as the console that will last you years and years to come... well, at least 4 years, by which time Microsoft and Sony will have developed something much better than the PS3, and Sony will have to step their game up yet again, and hope that the PS3 didn't cost them so much money that they don't have much in the way of ability to compete. Either way, with a 600$ price tag, and a more than 60$ game price tag, and a "free but needs to be because the console is so expensive" online service, and little to no exclusive arcade titles (compared to Nintendo's complete library and Sega arcade games), the PS3 and my wallet do not have a scheduled encounter any time in the future. I can't knock it's potential, but leading up to launch, it just doesn't look like they will be nabbing the average and casual gamer crowds. The 360 and Wii will take care of those demographics.

Personally I'm just going to wait and see how the PS3 actually plays out. All of the info we have right now doesn't really make a difference until we can actually see how it works out. When I first heard about Sony's online plan I thought it was rediculous. However, with what I've been hearing lately I like it. It's free for most games so a casual gamer doesn't haven't sign up for a "live" service that they are just going to use once a month... if that. The only thing you would have to pay for is the MMORPGs.

"For example, it is about $60 for a year of Live. That is all you need to play any Live game. With Sony's plan, I would need to pay about $7 a year for one game, maybe $10 bucks for another, and so on. With as little as 8 games, you could be paying more for whatever they're calling their silly little online service as you would for unlimited Xbox Live games." - ilmmad

You don't need to pay for most games! It is up to each individual company to decide if they are going to charge you (and most won't). Even if they do decide to charge you, we don't know how much or how often they will. Your claim is that with as little as 8 games you could pay for Xbox live... and maybe I'm just behind the times here but how many people play 8 games online consistently? I know I don't.

What do you call a rabid fanboy commentator that makes very little spelling mistakes and uses all the buzz words like "next-generation Blu-Ray drive for ultra-detailed game worlds + Blu-Ray movies(!), FullHD 1080p video output, TrueHD lossless 7.1 surround sound" ??

A marketing shill. Yeah Azn, I'm talking about you.

Rehashing the same shit over and over and over in a vain attempt to knock one platform to promote another is pretty sad and somewhat pathetic. If you aren't getting paid then you, sir, are one gullible individual.

*sigh*

I can't believe I'm actually posting here. I've stayed out of this debate ever since it started at E3 05, but it's time to say my piece.

First of all, to the people that keep screaming at "Sony fanboys" to stop bringing up the 1080p issue... well, it looks to me that it's the "M$ fanboys" who keep bringing it up. Every other post is "stop talking about 1080p, it doesn't matter"... but few people are talking about it except you.

Now, as for the meat of the debate... which company has the better console/online service/dick?

The answer: Does it matter? Buy what suits you best. Do you buy every game that comes out and play it online all day and all night until the next game comes out? Then perhaps it's best for you to avoid a subscription-per-game type of plan. Are you an occasional online gamer? Then perhaps paying a little bit per game is best for you, so you aren't paying $50 annually for a service you don't use that much.

Also, someone mentioned that Microsoft had "acquired all the sony exclusive titles"? That seems slightly hyperbolic. Is MGS coming to the xbox? How about Eight Days? Or Final Fantasy? Full Auto 2? Fatal Inertia? Tekken 6? White Knight Story?

But like I said, it's all about preference. As of right now, there is only one game on the Xbox360 I'm interested in playing, and that's Dead Rising. But that game is not worth $460+tax to me right now. For the PS3, I'm excited about at least half the games I listed above, plus some of the other non-exclusive titles that are more appealing to me on the PS3.

Speaking of, everyone keeps saying that developers creating cross-platform titles won't take advantage of the PS3 to it's fullest capabilities. Look at Marvel Ultimate Alliance. They are developing the game differently for each console. And I don't just mean different unlockables(which is there too), but I mean even the *graphics engines* differ. Of course, not all developers will be able to afford to do that... but if an unsigned developer has the option to develop for either console, he might be persuaded to develop for the one with more capability, stronger hardware, and that's easier to develop for.(I've read reports on the PS3 devkit, and that seems to be the general consensus at this point.)

So in case you can't tell, I'm a supporter of Sony. I'm not saying the Xbox360 sucks, even though I'm sure I can throw "facts" around to prove it, just like people here are throwing "facts" around to attack Sony. I'm just saying that of the two consoles, PS3 appeals more to me and what I want.

So instead of saying the other console sucks, just be content in your purchase, and explain why that console attracted you as a customer. Flame wars are pointless; knowledge sharing will get you everywhere.

Awesome post dschneider! If a person has to put down a console to make the other console look good, then that shows a flawed argument. My 360 is pretty good, but I too am looking forward to the PS3 and its games. The only real and assured exclusive games for any console are 1st party games, of which I at this time lean towards Sony. Halo is god to some people, and Forza and Fable are all they need. I prefer the Ratchet and Klank and Naughty Dog stuff, but that;s just what I prefer. That's the great thing about this hardware cycle, we as consumers have a real choice this go round.

Wow, Blast Factor looks absolutely nothing like Geometry Wars. I'm gonna mortgage my house and/or sell a kidney just to play it. Go Sony!

p.s. - You're worthless.

Woooo! I'm quasi-mentioned on the front page of Penny-Arcade by Tycho! I'm an anonymous celebrity for the next...like...couple hours or something!

Ummmmm... I'd just like to comment that the XBox fanboys (and, yes that is exactly what you are) need to please raise up some legitimate ARGUMENTS for the 360 instead of resorting to comments like
"aZn is a riot. Seriously, he is so adorable I could hug him. What keeps his wild rants from the rest of the ignorant masses is his good grammar. That is what makes him so cute to read.

Such a good boy..."

You keep saying that what PS3 is doing doesn't really matter or that they are doing this or that, but what exactly is the XBox360 offering that the PS3 isn't other than a better internet gaming service which isn't all that great since the gaming arena is dominated by a bunch of 13-year-old H4L0PHR34K5 and the ilk anyways? Seriously, please answer this question because you haven't so far.

I have an Xbox, and a 360, and personally there have been many titles I liked on them both, but the same can be said for the playstation1, and 2 that I own. I'm taking the wait and see approach on Sony's online deal. will it be good? who knows. we'll see after we have some more information.

31 TheRev
yea sony relies on ps3 about as much as microsoft relies on xbox sales.
Sony much like Microsoft does not rely soley on there video game consoles fr profit. where microsoft creates software, Sony builds alot of hardware ranging from Tvs, to part for computers, to entire computer systems.Microsoft also build hardware for machines, though they tend to keep it to keyboards, and I/O devices mainly. Sony is also involved with the movie, as well as music industry. Sony makes cameras as well, and even has games that aren't associated with the Playstation.
so to say that Sony Depends on the Playstation3 is a little silly.
that's like saying Mitsubishi Depends on car sales