Figboy

finally you post this story.

for a moment i thought you guys were too busy sipping champaigne and patting each other on the back for another job well done in fanning the flames of discord with that "Sony blackballs Kotaku" story.

to continue, the game is meant to be cheap and fun.

an old school game with a simple premise, but lots of fun to be had.

obviously, you guys are too young to remember that, back in the day, that was Nintendo's M.O on the NES.

most of the quality games on that console were cheap and fun (though, of course, they were charging us $50 a pop back then).

the X Box Live Arcade, PS Store, and Virtual Console are the 3 manufacturers ways of not losing our past, while still embracing and working within our gaming future and the market that it has evolved into.

i may have issue with all 3 companies at time, but i can totally respect them bringing us actual classics from gaming past, but also bringing us some new classics, and new games with a classic feel (such as Alien Hominid, Calling All Cars, and even flOw).

i'm simply not seeing the negative with the release of a game that will probably be under $10.

sure beats $50, and, say, $20 for Metroid (which is how much that title cost when rereleased on the GBA).

wow. once again the joystiq community turns a simple, average PS3 story about a downloadable game into a negative.

for those saying that this title doesn't justify the $600 price tag...*sigh*. i'm not even going to...wait, yes i am: you people are fucking stupid.

IT. IS. A. DOWN. LOADABLE. GAME.

i'm pretty sure Barbie's Horse Adventures won't have preferred treatment over, say, Shadow of the Colossus, or Resident Evil 4, or Splinter Cell.

after all, Sony realizes that most of the people who are purchasing a PS3 are over the age of 18, male, and probably don't give a rats ass about Barbie.

it's also really interesting to see how every site reports this story. Next Generation, for example, gives you the full story. i didn't know that the UK only had nearly 2500 games released there.

1000 out of 2500 isn't that awful. it's nearly half, and i'm sure your favorites will be supported. honestly, how many niche games do you play on your PS2? i have Disaster Report, but i never play it. i'm currently enjoying Rogue Galaxy, and FFXII on my PS3, and occassionally a game of Symphony of the Night. as long as the few titles i adore (like RE4 and MGS3), are compatible with my PS3, i'm good.

this story has been blown waaaaaaaay out of proportion.

in a few months time, backward's compatibility will be a memory.

or have you forgotten all the kickass PS3 games coming out this year?

Motorstorm
Ninja Gaiden Sigma
Warhawk
Lair
Heavenly Sword
LA Noire
Mercenaries 2
Metal Gear Solid 4
Final Fantasy XIII (at least in Japan)
White Knight Story (at least in Japan)
Dark Sector
GTA 4 (probably rendering GTA3 - San Andreas moot)
Devil May Cry 4
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
Ratchet and Clank PS3
Killzone PS3

tell me, why the flying fvck would i care about BC when all this is coming out, and the majority scheduled for this year?? and this isn't even the full list of releases on the PS3 and 360 this year!

multi-platform or not, outside of a few last gen RPGs (and God of War 2, which i'm certain will be supported by the PS3) i'm just not fretting about backwards compatability right now.

it's just, silly. seriously, guys.

the internet community is amazing sometimes. it's like all the neurotics of the world have gotten together to bitch and moan about trivial things. is rationality even in some of you people's repertoires?

um, SSX Blur is for the Wii.

my PS3 is collecting dust; my apartment is really, really dusty.

i play my PS3 everyday. $600 doorstop? i don't think so.

i've whiled away many hours on Resistance, Virtua Fighter 5, GTHD, Motorstorm demo (just one more week until i take home the full version), flOw, and some PS2 games i haven't finished yet.

i'm satisfied with my purchase enough to last me until the real big games come out.

after all, Motorstorm, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Lair, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy XIII, White Knight Story, LA Noire, Untold Realms: Monster Kingdom, Killzone PS3, Ratchet and Clank PS3, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, and DMC4 are only a few months away, most of them scheduled for a release sometime this year. all PS3 exclusive for now.

i personally don't see what the big deal is when the software lineup is as solid as it is, and there are still tons of titles not announced yet (and i'd love to reveal the few that i know are coming, but i'm not getting in trouble).

it's still too early in the PS3's lifecyle for all of this nonsense. also, i love what quotes joystiq chose to represent. it's very telling of their viewpoints on Sony.

i know most of you are all in "kneejerk reaction mode," but when you get the chance, read the entire interview. it's not full of the usual arrogance and cockiness that permeated most Sony PR interviews.

and besides, if you were being paid the big bucks to pimp a product, you wouldn't admit to any screw-ups or blunders either. remember the guy who was fired for admiting he enjoyed the 360 over the PS3? it's even worse when you're PR.

i don't think i'd risk my cushy, 6 figure a year job to appease the few whiny dissenters on the internet either.

the PS3 is a good system, with a lot of greatness under it's hood. it's only a matter of time before that greatness is harnessed by developers (and it won't be harnessed by EA or Activision, that's for certain).

you guys need to give it a rest and learn some patience.

it's just one more week, Josh.

these threads will be oh so hilarious come December 2007.

i'm laughing already, actually.

"to Zeichrat

Lunar Knights
Advance Wars Dual Strike
Metriod Hunters
New Super Mario Bros
Mario Kart DS
Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney
Hotel Dusk
Trauma Center
Starfox Command
Resident Evil

Now name PSP fun games
I'll start you.

Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops
Killzone
Loco Roco
Me and My Katamari

you go...also before you go the way sheppy did, make you you've actually played the games first, which he hasnt.

Posted at 2:28PM on Feb 24th 2007 by Kannon"

Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops
Killzone
Loco Roco
Me and My Katamari

you also forgot

Pursuit Force
The Warriors
Tekken: Dark Resurrection
Daxter
Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror
Exit
Lumines
GTA: Libetry City Stories
GTA: Vice City Stories
Kingdom of Paradise
Ratchet and Clank: Size Matters


on top of your list of four, the ones i named above are PSP games that i've played, own, and enjoy very very much.

i don't get what your point is.

the DS has some good games that people enjoy, and the PSP does also.

they're two different handhelds, for two different markets. both markets seem to be pleased with what they have, even if they aren't matching in sales (25 million PSPs sold isn't a bad thing in the least. it beats the 8 million units the Game Gear sold before it died, and the 3 million units the Atari Lynx sold before it died). the Playstation fanbase that the PSP is geared towards seem to enjoy their handheld as much as the Nintendo fanbase that the GB, GBA, GBASP, DS, and DS Lite seem to be geared for are enjoying their handheld.

"re: innovation: i was responding to your fervent praising of Sony "pushing the envelope" in the technology space, which i thought didn't really apply for the PS2 as great as that system was."

at the time the PS2 was considered to be a very powerful piece of techonolgy. it wasn't until a year later, when the X box and Gamecube came out, that the PS2 was considered "weak." considering how amazing games like MGS4 and FFXII are, i don't see it as being anything of the sort.

"Resident Evil 4 was a terrible example by the way since it wasn't Sony who made it, and was actually a downgraded version of the Gamecube original (speaking of nintendo)"

i was referring to the Gamecube version. on either system, RE4 is a great game. i've played through both versions, and the gameplay is practically identical. the point wasn't to spout of a bunch of Sony titles, but to point out that a good game is a good game, even if it's not the most innovative title out there (ie, RE4). it was simply an example.

"regardless, Ico, Turismo and such were all super innovative SOFTware for their time, but again, honestly ask those same developers what they think of the PS3 machine and launch and you'd be discouraged by their answer."

what does the launch have to do with much of anything? the PS2 had an atrocious launch. low unit availability (much lower than the PS3), and shitty, shitty launch titles. it wasn't until March of 2001 that it got something quality with a port of Resident Evil: Code Veronica, and Devil May Cry, Onimusha, and Zone of the Enders were released. prior to that, the PS2 had ass for games. funny, kind of like the PS3, but at least there is Resistance.

this March we have some quality ports (F.E.A.R., Oblivion), and some good first party stuff (Motorstorm, Calling All Cars for the network).

my ultimate point is that most games have shitty launches (the 360 was not immune in the least). this stage usually lasts for a few months, until around March or April (when did Oblivion on the 360 come out again?), from then on, things get better (as listed by the May-December lineup for the PS3 and the other consoles)

hell, i know the PS3 launch wasn't spectacular, but i'm looking beyond that. outside of Sony fans, there's not much reason for anyone to buy a PS3 now. much like it was for the PS2 before it. this period will go away, and soon. the first year of a console's life is never for the casuals, so they are a non-issue until at least 2008.

"of course i can't give you proof, they would lose their jobs, but all you have to do is listen to all the 3rd party developers who have spoken up and/or taken their previously exclusive PS3 games to 360."

my view on this is simply that, as long as the PS3 is getting a title, who cares if it's multiplatform or not.

does the Wii have Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Mercenaries 2, Stranglehold, Dark Sector, Heavy Rain, Mass Effect,

"note: as expensive as the PS2 was, it wasn't prohibitively more expensive than it's competition. not the case this time, if only. and swapping discs? is that really worth the cost? come on. again with the stretching."

it goes so much beyond swapping discs that i'm really tired of hearing that excuse.

tell me, would GTA 3, for example, have been possible on one CD? or a cartridge? certainly not. the point is that every time a new storage medium has been introduced to gaming, it offered experiences that just weren't possible on the previous generation of storage medium. this is an undeniable fact.

we have yet to see the true advantages of Blu Ray, just like 7 years ago we couldn't see the true advantage of having DVD in the PS2. i'm simply giving it the benefit of the doubt for games.

what, exactly, am i stretching? i'm just noting the trends in the industry. with new technology come more than just the usual graphical upgrades. gameplay changes also.

or do you remember when we used to play Gears of War or Shadow of the Colossus back on our NESes?

aside from eliminating disc swapping, a 25/50 gig disc naturally allows for higher quality textures for those that have HD sets (which is slowly becoming the new standard in television sets), and a lot more room for more content in game, adding value to your buck).

i'm not going to dismiss the inclusion of Blu Ray, as, if i didn't have an interest in it, i wouldn't have bought my PS3 this year. i would have waited for the price to go down, and we all know it will. i just don't see the point of jumping down Sony's throat everytime something like this pops up when the simple answer would be to just not buy their products? easy as pie, really.