Topic: Who is going to buy a PS3 Slim?

[kraken613]

I wouldn't buy it even if it were $100.

And I think it's ridiculous to suggest that Sony "grew" gaming more than Nintendo did. Sony would have never even entered the gaming industry if it weren't for Nintendo. They created a partnership to develop a CD-system add-on for the Super Nintendo, but Nintendo backed out of the deal when Sega's CD add-on failed. Sony took the tech and released it stand-alone as the PlayStation. A couple years later they ripped the analogue stick and rumble pack from Nintendo's 64-bit system and that's when the system sales started to pick up.

Sony's secret to success? Steal ideas from the real pioneers.

There where bigger innovators than Microsoft.

[Mop it up]

The ESRB was formed in 1994. The more I think about it, Final Fantasy VI/III might have an ESRB rating, because I often forget how much longer it took to reach North America.

If there are things which were censored from the Japanese version then it likely wasn't Nintendo who demanded they be censored. It was probably done because otherwise it would have received a "T" rating from the ESRB which would limit the appeal. An example of this is Earthbound, which has a scene where Ness (the main character) is naked in the Japanese version but has pajamas in the North American version.

[RABicle]

Hold up guys I just need to take a **** in the dunny. You can continue when I get back.

[that Baby guy]

That was a decision by Squaresoft's translator, Ted Woosely.  The whole spell names translation was done because he figured he'd simplify spell names for space reasons.  Holy became "Pearl" because there were white, pearlish objects, and it was the only holy-based attack in the game.  Don't blame Nintendo just because you don't know why things were named like they were.  Those were limitations of Square's localization process, and they carried over into Final Fantasy VII, in the most part.

[broodwars]

That was a decision by Squaresoft's translator, Ted Woosely.  The whole spell names translation was done because he figured he'd simplify spell names for space reasons.  Holy became "Pearl" because there were white, pearlish objects, and it was the only holy-based attack in the game.  Don't blame Nintendo just because you don't know why things were named like they were.  Those were limitations of Square's localization process, and they carried over into Final Fantasy VII, in the most part.

Right, I couldn't remember if Holy became "white" or "Pearl".  Thanks for that.  Just to point something out, though: "Holy" = 4 characters.  "Pearl" = 5 characters.  How exactly does changing the spell name from "Holy" to "Pearl" "simply spell names for space reasons"?

[RABicle]

HEH HEY STEADY ON GUYS I WAS ON THE TOILET!

So yeah Nintendo were holding the industry back by ruining boring games? What is going on again?

[kraken613]

This is worth the $299 alone.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/08/18/slow-down-and-watch-this-new-uncharted-2-trailer/

[Deguello]

Not really no.  Is that game a PS3 Slim Exclusive?

[RABicle]

Aww thanks Kraken but I've already played Tomb Raider Legend.

[that Baby guy]

That was a decision by Squaresoft's translator, Ted Woosely.  The whole spell names translation was done because he figured he'd simplify spell names for space reasons.  Holy became "Pearl" because there were white, pearlish objects, and it was the only holy-based attack in the game.  Don't blame Nintendo just because you don't know why things were named like they were.  Those were limitations of Square's localization process, and they carried over into Final Fantasy VII, in the most part.

Right, I couldn't remember if Holy became "white" or "Pearl".  Thanks for that.  Just to point something out, though: "Holy" = 4 characters.  "Pearl" = 5 characters.  How exactly does changing the spell name from "Holy" to "Pearl" "simply spell names for space reasons"?

He changed it because he thought it was a better name for the attack.  It probably didn't make sense to him how something "Holy" could deal damage.  The entire translation was up to him to do in 30 days, and he didn't consistently make the best decisions, he'll admit that.

[broodwars]

That was a decision by Squaresoft's translator, Ted Woosely.  The whole spell names translation was done because he figured he'd simplify spell names for space reasons.  Holy became "Pearl" because there were white, pearlish objects, and it was the only holy-based attack in the game.  Don't blame Nintendo just because you don't know why things were named like they were.  Those were limitations of Square's localization process, and they carried over into Final Fantasy VII, in the most part.

Right, I couldn't remember if Holy became "white" or "Pearl".  Thanks for that.  Just to point something out, though: "Holy" = 4 characters.  "Pearl" = 5 characters.  How exactly does changing the spell name from "Holy" to "Pearl" "simply spell names for space reasons"?

He changed it because he thought it was a better name for the attack.  It probably didn't make sense to him how something "Holy" could deal damage.  The entire translation was up to him to do in 30 days, and he didn't consistently make the best decisions, he'll admit that.

Like having characters get "full" on "soup", acting drunk and passing out instead of getting "drunk" on prehistoric liquor?  Yeah, that was priceless. 

[that Baby guy]

Yup, all that because of ESRB ratings.  Have you read what Mop_it_up said?  Alcohol ratings gave you a T, which meant less people would play the game.

[kraken613]

Not really no.  Is that game a PS3 Slim Exclusive?

But if you don't have a PS3.

Aww thanks Kraken but I've already played Tomb Raider Legend.

I really hope you are joking... Go out and play Uncharted its an amazing game.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Man, if all GC had was Uncharted and an unfinished racing game it'd be laughed off the planet.

[kraken613]

You seriously think that is all?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Damn, thats a big difference is size from that angle.

[broodwars]

You seriously think that is all?

Dude, seriously...if he hasn't been otherwise convinced by the lists several of us put up earlier in the thread stating worthwhile PS3 games, nothing anyone says will.  It's not worth getting worked up over.

[Deguello]

Lists never convince anybody.

[BranDonk Kong]

Uncharted 2 is so realistic with its brick walls that get destroyed by helicopters and its bulletproof wooden tables. "Don't hide behind that cement wall, it's no use - here take cover from this office furniture instead!"

[BlackNMild2k1]

You seriously think that is all?

Dude, seriously...if he hasn't been otherwise convinced by the lists several of us put up earlier in the thread stating worthwhile PS3 games, nothing anyone says will.  It's not worth getting worked up over.

It's Pro... our most sarcastic member. Of course he thinks that's all...

[Djunknown]

And I think it's ridiculous to suggest that Sony "grew" gaming more than Nintendo did. Sony would have never even entered the gaming industry if it weren't for Nintendo. They created a partnership to develop a CD-system add-on for the Super Nintendo, but Nintendo backed out of the deal when Sega's CD add-on failed.

A history lesson.

The SNES-CD was to be announced at the June 1991 Consumer Electronics Show (CES). However, when Hiroshi Yamauchi read the original 1988 contract between Sony and Nintendo, he realized that the earlier agreement essentially handed Sony complete control over any and all titles written on the SNES CD-ROM format. Yamauchi decided that the contract was totally unacceptable and he secretly canceled all plans for the joint Nintendo-Sony SNES CD attachment. Instead of announcing a partnership between Sony and Nintendo, at 9 a.m. the day of the CES, Nintendo chairman Howard Lincoln stepped onto the stage and revealed that Nintendo was now allied with Philips, and Nintendo was planning on abandoning all the previous work Nintendo and Sony had accomplished. Lincoln and Minoru Arakawa had, unbeknownst to Sony, flown to Philips headquarters in Europe and formed an alliance of a decidedly different nature—one that would give Nintendo total control over its licenses on Philips machines.

By the end of 1992, Sony and Nintendo reached a deal whereby the "Sony Play Station" would still have a port for SNES games, but Nintendo would own the rights and receive the bulk of the profits from the games, and the SNES would continue to use the Sony-designed audio chip.

Its a story of greed vs greed. In this case, I think Sony won that round. Why?

Nintendo backed this. And they allowed these abominations to exist, no matter how much Bill (RIP) denied it.

On Final Fantasy VI:

In a January 1995 interview with Super Play magazine, translator Ted Woolsey explained that "there's a certain level of playfulness and ... sexuality in Japanese games that just doesn't exist here [in the USA], basically because of Nintendo of America's rules and guidelines".[41] Consequently, objectionable graphics (e.g. nudity) were censored and building signs in towns were changed, as well as religious allusions (e.g. the spell Holy was renamed Pearl).

Boldface mine.

On Chrono Trigger:

Lacking the help of a modern translation team, he memorized scenarios and looked at drafts of commercial player's guides to put dialogue in context.[39] Woolsey later reflected that he would have preferred two-and-a-half months, and blames his rushed schedule on the prevailing attitude in Japan that games were children's toys rather than serious works.[39] Some of his work was cut due to space constraints, though he still considered Trigger "one of the most satisfying games I ever worked on or played."[40][39] Nintendo of America censored certain dialogue, including references to breastfeeding, consumption of alcohol, and religion.[38] Square shipped Trigger with two world maps, and Japanese buyers who preordered received holographic foil cards.

Bold face mine.

About the ESRB


On topic, PS3Slim for $299? I'll put it on the Christmas list...

[Mop it up]

I always forget the order of events of those SNES CD-based add-ons. I didn't think what I said was exactly right but I didn't feel like looking it up.

It doesn't matter though because my points still stand. Sony wouldn't have entered the gaming industry if it weren't for Nintendo, and Nintendo's censorship policies were eventually dropped because of the ESRB.

[that Baby guy]

Not to mention, DJunknown, that same censorship that's claimed to have been enforced by Nintendo remained in the PS re-release of the games, despite a new translation for FFIV in that re-release series, as well as unlockables and bonuses.

[dack25]

The Wii is not cutting it for me, plain and simple.  There are games on the horizon I'm looking forward to but they're too infrequent.  The third party support is crap and is not going to change.  Nintendo's first party releases are now split between the new market and the old so from my perspective their output is decreased.  And realistically I just don't seem to be a priority to them.  They don't care if I'm satisfied or not.  They're making money hand over fist so they're not going to change anything.  I feel like they're taking my support for granted.  But I'll still have my Wii and will buy the titles that do interest me.  Next gen is up in the air though.  Right now I'd say they've lost me for next gen if they maintain the status quo.

And that is the reason why I just have never gotten behind the Wii. I don't even feel compelled to buy games for it. It seems to have the same problems as the GCN (no third party support and long game droughts) but there is also something about it that seems sloppy from Nintendo's standpoint. Maybe it's just how there is a constant lack of quality titles or maybe because I stuck with them during the Cube days (some very dark gaming days) and nothing about GCN quality games being repackaged with new controls excites me, I don't know it's something that's bothered me all generation.

As far as the PS3 Slim, I'm not a fan of the new design but it saves space so it is effective. Too bad there's just not much on the PS3 that interests me aside from MGS4 and having a Blu-Ray player. There's just not enough games I like to justify buying one when I own a 360. I think someone mentioned the price earlier and I think that killed them because if you look at it from a features and durability standpoint it is better than the 360 but the price and initial inferior lineup gave the 360 the edge (and was part of my reason for buying one).

[Ian Sane]

I wouldn't buy it even if it were $100.

And I think it's ridiculous to suggest that Sony "grew" gaming more than Nintendo did. Sony would have never even entered the gaming industry if it weren't for Nintendo. They created a partnership to develop a CD-system add-on for the Super Nintendo, but Nintendo backed out of the deal when Sega's CD add-on failed. Sony took the tech and released it stand-alone as the PlayStation. A couple years later they ripped the analogue stick and rumble pack from Nintendo's 64-bit system and that's when the system sales started to pick up.

Sony's secret to success? Steal ideas from the real pioneers.

I don't see why any of this should affect one's decision to buy a PS3.  So I should only support those that do things first?  Is competency not worth anything?

Here is the long and short of it.  I want a PS3 because the amount of games for it I'm interested in exceeds the amount of Wii games I even own.  I want another console because the Wii library SUCKS with the odd amazing game among piles of total horseshit trash.  The PS3 may not be doing anything new but it's at least doing something reasonably WELL.  It has good third party support and is clearly aimed at gamers.

The Wii is very innovative but innovation does not make something great.  I find the remote to be a irresponsive gimmick controller that is a HUGE chore to use.  Yes it is very creative but with a controller I want something that is practical and responsive and the remote utterly fails at that.  And it hasn't resulted in a big revolution in game design.  If anything it's revolutionary in a business sense in that as a marketing tool it has attracted a whole new audience for Nintendo that has turned the company from a last-place afterthought to the market leader.  But from a videogame perspective it's done little.  The best Wii game is Super Mario Galaxy and that plays like a Cube game with the odd remote-driven mini-game thrown in.  Nintendo seems content to use the remote for tech demos aimed at non-gamers and re-releasing Cube games.  Even if the remote can revolutionize games Nintendo is making no effort in using it as such.

What matters is the best games.  In the past Nintendo used their innovative ideas to make the best games.  Now they don't so the competition has better games by just merely doing things competently.  Innovation does not instantly make you the best.  Using innovation in a way that gives your product a significant improvement over everyone else's makes you the best.