From Cans Two PlayStation 3 Titles?

Like the exodus of jews from Egypt, all the publishers are thinking with their wallets and bailing, nothing wrong with that since no one has a PS3 yet.

Blu Ray could be the daeth of PS3 itself, its just too expensive a risk for so many people. Now the very thing Nintendo said about cost is now starting to bite hard. I'm sure From can easily shift their goods to 360 or Wii though.

From Software, you really need to try something else than Armored Core series though.

I'm not usually one to jump on bad metaphors and similes, but this makes no sense.

If you believe the Bible, the Jews were oppressed slaves who were led out of servitude by a charismatic bloke who caused trouble for the authorities to persuade them that holding on to the Jews was more trouble that it was worth.

Some developers are putting PS3 development on hiatus because they have concerns over the cost of development and the possibility of return on investment.

How, in any way, are those two related?

Okay, agreed that's a bad comparison considering what's going on, my apologies people, its really early but that's no excuse.

Yes, decent rpgs, not that Lost Kingdoms rubbish, sort it out, From.

You are such a troll tyrion [mod] , your P$3 fanboyism is so ridicule, I sure hope so M$ & $ony to fail in the videogame industry & would see with good eyes a comeback from Sega or NEC in the hardware part of it, M$ & $ony are the Nazi of videogaming... you have to be blind to support corporate companies that would kill videogaming if we let them... long live Nintendo!!!

Please! I point things out where I see them. Currently there is overly huge negativity on the Internet towards Sony and I try to balance things out.

I'm not anti-Nintendo at all - I have a GBA and a GameCube and like them both. I'm excited about the Wii and will probably get one and launch day.

Perhaps you are so used to fanboyism on the Internet that you can't recognise a balanced opinion when you see one? I can't blame you, there aren't many of us left.

Oh and that would be Nintendo Corporation Limited - a corporate company. One that has has been responsible for many anti-competitive initiatives in the past. Many more so than Sony in fact.

And using dollar signs in company names is way past being funny.

All that said, I want Microsoft out of the games industry because I can see what they have done to the operating system and office suite markets. Doesn't stop the 360 being a good machine or Live being an excellent service, I just wish they came from Apple or Toshiba or someone.

Yeah, 'cos that makes sense. What have they done to the OS market? They've meant that I have a PC and can buy almost any piece of software in the world and know that it will work with Windows.

If only the same could be said about consoles. Want to play Halo? Only if you've got an Xbox or 360. Want to play God of War? Only if you've got a PS2. Want to play Mario? Only if you've got a Nintendo machine.

Yeah, consolidating the market really sucks, doesn't it - oh no, hang on, it doesn't.

Picking out Microsoft as the evil ones is quite childish too. iPod has almost as large a share of the portable music player market as Windows does of operating systems, but you're happy to pick Apple out as a shining example of a public-spirited company (my hyperbole, added for effect). It's a little bit pathetic really.

Sure everythings runs on your windows...untill MS decides "time for a new cashcow...i mean OS to FORCE on the people by locking out NEW games and programs on the old ones" Ole, another 150 euro's down the pipe for what? Another version of Windows NT with more flashy stuff that can make your PC crash twice as fast as before woohoo!! Probably in Windows Vista you can pick the color your error screen will be in!

There's a reason why Intell and AMD nag at MS for negating every leap in performance they achieve in terms of cpu's when MS releases a new Windows, bloatware that has no equal, not even spyware!

It's called technological stagnation and MS forced it down on us like Western nations force intrest payments from the third world so they stay in the very exploitable position for them (it's good analogy right? right...).

Apple doesn't have a monolopy (they got 80% and slowly shrinking) and they won't have one soon either. Apple is in no way in the same position as MS in terms of MP3-players and musicservices. The French goverment accepted a law that FORCES Apple to open their format to other MP3-players which negates their biggest ace to have a MS-like vicegrip on their market (won't take too long till the whole EU accepts the French law me thinks), competitiors are standing by at every possible corner. It's a frikkin miracle that Apple has been able to keep that huge marketshare for so long.

Apple would be a better consolemanufacter then MS by a long shot. Handheld developer is another thing...with 4 hours lifespan you're not going to pull it Apple...

Stagnation. Competition breeds innovation. Monopolies breed complacency. Have a look at the competition that was around even 15 years ago. Have a look at the rate of change that there was within operating systems 15-10 years ago. Now all you get are glitzy updates to the same old thing. How many features have been pulled from Vista, and it's still late? How long has it taken Microsoft to provide an update to IE despite how s**te a product it is?

You don't need a mono-culture to interoperate. SPOnG is just as usable on Windows, Mac OS, Linux, Free BSD, Symbian 60 and PSP. That's what interoperability standards do for you.


Want to play FIFA? How about GTA? Lego Star Wars? Tomb Raider? Hitman? Cars? Pro Evo? Need for Speed?

We don't need one console to rule them all, we have developers who are willing to put the time into porting games to many platforms. Look at the comments around here when a platform-exclusive game is mentioned by a third party. Third-party exclusives get people's backs up.

All the games you mention above are developed by the platform holders, of course they aren't going to run on other consoles. Try getting Safari for Windows or Outlook for Linux.


How many viruses have you had on Windows? How many spyware apps? How many attempts on your system? Conversely, how long do you spend updating anti-virus software, firewalls and spyware blockers?

Market consolidation as you call it, or the mono-culture of operating systems has led to the proliferation of viruses and spyware. If there were a better mix of operating systems then there would be no Code Red, Nimda or the rest.

One vulnerability affects everybody, there is no natural immunity to any attack, that's how civilisations get wiped out. Ask the West Indians that Columbus met when he landed how much they enjoyed having no immunity to Influenza.

By pursuing standardising on a platform instead of on interoperation, Microsoft have opened all of our PCs to the world and allowed the script kiddies to make everybody's lives a misery. If you don't realise this, then you have a zombie on your PC and are probably being used to DDOS some poor shmuck right now.

Put an undefended PC on the Internet and it will be compromised in under ten minutes. This is only possible because of the market domination that Microsoft have achieved.


Apple didn't force their unpopular products onto vendors on the back of their popular ones. Microsoft have done, if you didn't sell Office, you got no allocation of Windows 95, for example.

Apple haven't driven as many companies under as Microsoft have, or bought out as many, or sued to closure as many, or stolen work from as many, or got as many in Hobson's choice licenses.

Face facts, we would be in a much better position if Windows, Mac OS, Linux and the rest had equal shares of the desktop market and all used standard file formats and communication protocols. Look how easy it is to use the Internet because it was designed from the beginning to be platform indifferent.

Put it this way, would you really want there to be only one console? Would you really want to have every developer in the world beholden to one platform holder? If there were nothing but Xbox 360, I can tell you right now, there would be nowhere near as much innovation in games as there is now.

The same would be true if there were only PS3 or only Wii, of course, but of the three current platform holders only Microsoft have a proven track record of using illegal business practices to maintain a monopoly position in one market and use that position to take over other markets.

You may have another point of view over how we have got to the point were are in today, but everything I have pointed out above informs my point of view that I don't want Microsoft in the games market. You don't invite the school bully to your birthday party, that's no fun for anybody else.

How can Blu Ray be the death of the PS3? I just saw that the Robbin Williams movie RV is coming out on RV...Is that not enough to save it?

All this crap is only applicable to the OS market where MS has had dominance since Jebus was a junebug. Because they were so beloved of home computers users? No. Home users were an insignificant market force until it was far too late. Because they used illegal buisness practices. No. They were able to do that BECAUSE of their dominant position. Because developmental stagnation and universal homogeneity were exactly what buisnesses were comforatable with and thought they wanted? *ding ding ding*

There is only one way that MS could ever dominate the console landscape as they have the OS market. That would be for MS to deliver vastly superior product. A horrid thought, I realize. Then, because this strategy might not work in Japan, they'd have to name the console something really goofy-sounding AND pack a pair of soiled white panties in every box. *whispers* or they could just buy all the developers...but for chrissakes don't give them THAT idea!

edit:just reread one of your earlier posts in this thread...do you have a balanced viewpoint or are you balancing out anti-Sony sentiment and dedicated to running MS out of the gaming industry? And Sony didn't need to engage in anti-competitive measures, so they engaged in anti-consumer measures.

Hey you guys, you have just derailed this news thread. Get back on track please.

Blame it on the Nintendo fanboy, heh...

They didn't really have dominance until they managed to crush IBM's OS/2 - a project they were originally working on with IBM until they broke all ties and pushed Windows instead.

The rest of your comment implies that you have little knowledge of the way Microsoft got to the stage they are at now. I'd point you to sources, but I think you may assume I'm weighting the deck by pointing you towards places that back up my opinion. The facts are out there for you to find if you are interested.


I have a balanced viewpoint and that allows me to balance out the negativity towards Sony because I can stand there and say how uninformed and biased a lot of opinions are.

I admit I don't particularly like Microsoft and make no attempt to hide this. However, I'm perfectly willing to say that the 360 is a good machine and that Live is a fantastic service.

The problem is that the anti-Sony crowd, and in fact the anti-Nintendo crowd, don't seem to be able to separate their biases from facts. I try to point out the facts, as I understand them, when I see that sort of (anti-)fanboyism.

The reason I stand out now is that there are hardly any people standing up for Sony at the moment.


Are we back to the rootkit here, or the PS2 DVD drive issues? Another branch of the corporation or years in the past?

Or are you upset about the price of the PS3? In that case don't buy one. Nobody is forcing you to get a PS3, there is no anti-consumer measure here.

Yeah, sorry about that everybody. In my defence I was just fighting my corner when accused of fanboyism. An accusation that came out of nowhere, I may add.

you got serious doublespeak issues dude.

Objective is objective, not objective, subject to subjective interpretation. You don't get to trumpet your objectivity AND your subjective opinion in the same breath just because you think you're the only one who knows what they're on about.

Tell you what, since you're so well informed, why don't you make the call...

Is it appropriate to bring up the actions of a console companies other divisions and past actions? Because you're sending me mixed signals here. Oh wait, I think I understand the pattern now...

Its OK, as long as its supporting YOUR position, but if anyone else does it, they're wrong. Or is it OK as long as they're attacking MS, Sony not so much... works out to about the same in practice though, apparently.

Just a note that you can already change the colour of the "blue screen of death".

I don't like Microsoft. And originally, I didn't want them in console gaming, because once they get to the top of the pile you can't seem to topple them. Gradually, the competition dies and the only products you can buy are Microsoft products. Commerical development of products in the same market becomes imporssible.

Now, I think that Microsoft have done a lot of good in operating systems. Technically, Windows is very good. Yes, people may moan about it, but as a feat of software engineering it is very impressive - any standard, popular product will have exploits found it in and viruses written for it. That's just the way things are. Linux is probably as buggy as Windows (probably more so), but Linux doesn't have thousands of angry open-source crackers working on exploits. Also impressive is the fact that it has established such a solid standard (as another poster mentioned, you can buy software and know it will work). At the moment, in my humble opinion, Windows is the best desktop operating system in existance (servers are a different matter). It's got to the top by being the best.

However, the problem now is that there is no innovation in the sector, because Microsoft is the only person in the market. From Windows 2000, changes in XP were fairly minor and Vista looks suspiciously like bloatware to me. This is where competition is important; Microsoft have reached the "best product" and have no reason to push the product any further in a way that benefits consumers - only for profit. And, again as another poster mentioned, they can force upgrades on people because they are in a dominant position - my nice new laptop with Windows XP will be useless by the end of next year because it won't have (and won't run) Vista.

At the moment we have a healthy console market. The competitors are pushing each other to innovate, and all the companies have sufficient market share and resources to innovate. Sony and Microsoft are fighting for the traditional market and the new media set-top box market, and Nintendo are trying to do something innovative to differentiate. Which may well fail in the long-term (although after watching Tony Hawk's my opinion on the Wii has gone up quite a bit - most of Nintendo's E3 games looked uncontrollable to me, noted by the fact the guy demoing Zelda on-stage was having problems controlling Link).

At the moment, because of the above, I'm not as concerned about Microsoft as I was originally. If Microsoft becomes number one in the consoles, we will have problems. Say Microsoft "beats" Sony this generation and next generation, and buys Nintendo in-between. There will be no competition. There will be no drive for creativity anymore, and we will be left being fed the minimum Microsoft needs to feed us to make money - and we know from the operating system and office suite market that this will happen.

(Incidently, I find the office suite market really interesting. I still use Office 97, because I found the products went downhill from there - there didn't seem to be any useful extra features at all. The new features that there were made the products more unusable to me - for example disappearing menu items, multi-level clipboards etc).

Perhaps I didn't word my comment clearly. Let me try again.

I try to point out the balanced view. This is so uncommon on games forums that it can appear as fanboyism in the opposite direction.

If someone says "Sony hardware is a sack of s**t and the PSP doesn't sell" then I point out that I have had no issues with Sony hardware and that the PSP sells quite well in the UK, which is using the facts to balance (or counter, if you prefer) the statement I am replying to. I don't say "Sony Roxxors and the PSP is the s**t!", which is just being stupid.

I also point out my opinions, like the Microsoft thing, but I try to make sure people know they are opinion.

Please point out a comment of mine that is wildly biased that I presented as fact and not opinion.


This is a valid question and one I have not seen addressed.

I assume, in relation to Sony, we are talking abut the Sony BMG rootkit fiasco here? If not, please point out where I have gone wrong.

With Sony BMG, we have a separate company, part owned by Sony, with separate leadership in place. Sort of like Ford owning Jaguar, for example, except that Ford totally owns Jaguar.

In Microsoft's home entertainment division, we have just that, a division of the same company, with the same leadership, that has entered another market in the same way that Apple entered the portable music player market with the iPod.

I hope you can see that the two situations are different?

I'm trying to think of an analogy to make things more clear, but they mostly turn out to be based on the difference between countries in Europe and states in the USA, which I don't think gets the point across particularly well.

I almost want to cry. You are all arguing over stuff that you really have no control over. Microsoft doesn't care if you don't use Windows. You are insignificant, get over it. Support who and what you will, but Microsoft is here to stay.

I don't like Windows, but I don't hate it. Yeah, viruses are a problem, but if we were to suddenly have a huge Linux boom and MS crash, 10 bucks says we would see many-a-virus for Linus.

I have a few PC's, one of which has been kept very clean for the past 4 years. Hasn't need to be reformatted yet. Runs like a dream, and it runs WinXP. If you look at porn, expect some spyware.

Go back to your PC and stop complaining. MS did something right to get where they are, I can't create a better OS so I'll use whats available.

I just think you have "balanced" and "balancing" confused. Kinda like Fox News, I'm sure in your view you think you're being "Fair and Balanced". Fair is Fair, but your "Balanced" means "Biased". A simple fulcrum analogy will serve. You don't balance the weight on a fulcrum by adding an equal amount of weight on both sides.

Also, mark me down as agreeing with pretty much everything Adam said. Except I don't think Japan would allow MS to buy Nintendo. The words National "Treasure" or even "Security" would probably be used. No MS domination means they behave, they behave means no worries. I'm just grateful someone outside of Japan is involved in the game. As much as I appreciate and admire Japaneese culture, in the absence of serious Western comptetion (It don't get much more serious than MS) the Japaneese market would tend to exert a more opressive influence. I cannot help but think that this has only served to diversify the sector. I mean wither goest thou, WWII FPS, if not Xbox?

aside:Incidentally, I will never forgive EA for not porting Allied Assault to Xbox...Frontline a day(year) late and a dollar short(it looked like a PS2 game) didn't cut it. Speaking of anti-consumer practices...EA and Sony, yes I'm looking at you.(No, that wasn't what I was thinking of either)

And no, I wasn't thinking of the rootkit or the PS2 DVD(MS has had its own DVD issues), thanks for reminding me, since you prematurely invalidated anything Sony's done "years ago" I guess its not important. Nice dodge, btw...even if that wasn't what I was shootin' at.


what he said.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion of my posts, just as I would hope you would respect my opinion of yours. However, I am trying to point out how I approach things, so I'll have one more try to get my point across, after this I'm not gonna waste everybody else's time by posting here. If you want to continue this offline, you can find my email address on the SPOnG team page under about SPOnG below.

I try to take a fair and balanced view of things and use that fair and balanced approach to counter wild speculation and uninformed rants.

Your fulcrum analogy seems slightly mis-worded, I assume you were saying that you don't make thing balanced by adding an equal amount of weight to both ends of an already unbalanced fulcrum? Because by causing the weight on both sides to be equal, you will achieve balance. Of course equal large amounts of weight will break the see-saw, so to speak, that's a flame war!

To stretch the analogy a bit, I'm saying my weight is closer to the fulcrum than the weight that is already there - inevitably my arguments will have less impact than the weight at either end.

It's up to you if you believe that or not, please read back through my other posts and decide for yourself if I'm more fact-based than the average forum poster. I have even admitted when I was wrong - I didn't see much potential for the DS, boy did I screw up that guess!


Then what are you accusing Sony of doing that is anti-consumer?

Nice dodge by the way, negating my explanation without providing the reasons you are accusing Sony, so I can't even try to counter them. :-)