Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by PlanetPanton | PlanetPanton's ProfileDestructoid
PlanetPanton's Profile - Destructoid




Game database:   #ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ         ALL     Xbox One     PS4     360     PS3     WiiU     Wii     PC     3DS     DS     PS Vita     PSP     iOS     Android




About
Badges
Following  



[Above: Not me, but it's my dream to live in South Park!]

I game on my PS3, and I love it like crazy! So why would I want to make the switch to PC?

Well let me start off with the reasons why I would like to make the switch. Every generation you have to buy the new console, or be stuck with your old console that won't get any support; decent support anyway. This can be quite costly. The PS1 was $299 at launch, the PS2 was $299 as well, and the PS3 was priced at the very infamous...599 US dollars. In total, no tax in this math, that would be $1200. Thats a pretty nice ass PC you could of built.

On top of buying the new systems, you have to buy new controllers. All consoles have one controller bundled with the console, so think of the controller as your mouse and keyboard. If you want to play a local multiplayer game on your console (PS3 in this example), then you will have to dish out another $60 on each controller; and each of those controllers will become USE LESS when the next generation arrives. If you want to play a local multiplayer game on PC then you can pick up mice and keyboards for much cheaper than $60, and those will last you basically forever, or until you want to get a new mouse and keyboard. Or better yet, you could have your buddy bring over his/her mouse and keyboard. (who the hell doesn't have those 2 things? hehe) Some games just don't seem like they would play as well with a mouse+keyboard when compared to the dualshock3. I can't imagine playing a game like Little Big Planet on a keyboard without two analog sticks, well I can't imagine being able to swing my arms in the adorable way that I can with a dualshock3. (though you can hook up joysticks, controllers, or whatever to your PC that is practically the same thing as a console controller)


[I'm sure Crysis looks about 100x better now]

Graphics and visuals are a very important thing, and there is no denying that the PC is the #1 machine when it comes down to the graphics. The PC basically has no limits to power, other than your wallet; but like I said above, console gaming puts a bigger hole in your wallet than PC gaming. There is really nothing else to say in this paragraph, haha, PC is the most powerful.

Now I would like to talk about modifications, better knows as simply 'mods'. I love games that have user generated content. Games like Little Big Planet, Modnation Racers, inFamous 2, and I am impressed by other consoles UGC tools in games such as Halo: Reach. Very few console games have tools for UGC, while pretty much every PC game can be modified, and many developers give the community tools for modding. (but console UGC seems to be generally MUCH more user friendly) PC gaming allows for new content at any time because of the community and the mods they make.


[EA is crowned the King of shutting down servers!

Another thing that is great about the PC community and the freedom PC gaming brings, is that you can bring games that use online and have been shutdown, back to life. I am loving the hell out of Bioshock 2 multiplayer right now, but I am so worried that the online for it will be shutdown. That wouldn't really be a problem on PC, because I know I could make my own servers and host games, or someone else could; all you need is the know-how.

Now what about my reasons for sticking with console gaming, specifically the PS3?

Well it is very simple. The exclusive games, and exclusive content. Sony's exclusives are some of my favorite games, the Uncharted series, the LBP series, Killzone, Resistance, the list goes on. I have no doubt that those games would be much better on PC, but I do doubt they ever will come to PC. Then there is PS3 exclusive content for games such as Mortal Kombat, Mafia 2, Saints Row 3, L.A. Noire, and so on. Sure the mods from the community are probably much better to have than a tiny bit of exclusive content, but it is a bit bothering that that content won't ever come to your platform

My biggest problem with PC gaming is not the fault of PC's, but the fault of publishers and their bull shit. I haven't paid to much attention to DRM (downloading rights management) or anything like that lately. I do know that from what I've heard, some publishers are just straight up dicks. I can't believe how they treat some PC gamers. Many publishers say it is a fight against piracy, but they seem to end up hurting the actual consumer, and not the pirates.

I would love to start gaming on the PC, it is just so appealing. However, I am in love with my PS3 exclusives. It seems like I will stop buying multiplatform games on my PS3, and just wait to buy those when I get a nice PC. I hope to get enough money to get a good gaming PC, and use that as my primary system, and use my PS3 as my secondary; strictly for exclusives. PC gaming just makes so much more sense.

Thank you very much for taking the time to read my blog post, good gaming to you all! :)










I have struggled a lot with my own views on Nintendo for years now. You might know what I'm talking about if you have read some of my comments on articles; some posts might of seemed positive and intelligent, while others seemed negative and based on fanboyism/ignorance. (*cough* Sofik). I wasn't happy about my confusing and ever-changing relationship with Nintendo, but fortunately our relation has developed into a healthy friendship.

Speaking of friends and relationships, lets start off with a little background information. I grew up on my friends video game systems, I didn't really own any personally. I did have a Mac with "Kid Pix" and some of Pangea Soft's games.(great memories of playing with my siblings on that computer) But back on topic, I was a kid growing up in the 90's. So like most kids, I played video games. Just some PlayStation, but lots of N64. The sixty-four was my favorite out of the two, even though I enjoyed it, I never asked my parents or Santa (parents strike again) for one.

The reason I didn't ask for one was simply because, I didn't really want a video game system. I had enough friends who had video games all ready, plus I was more of a "toy" kinda kid. One of my greatest nostalgic memories is all the awesome (I would say they were epic) toy set-ups me and my brother made, playmobil, lego, stuffed animals, give us anything and we would of done something really creative with it; we would play the hell out of our creation.

Basically I didn't really have the urge to play video games at my house, I could play with my brother and sister, I could watch some Rugrats (Nickelodeon was the best in the 90's) or do whatever. If I did have a need to play video games, I would just go to one of my friends house and play some sixty-four, preferably BomberMan64. We would play for at least 20 minutes at a time, usually 45-60 minutes, then we would bounce on the trampoline, play with plastic cowboys and plastic army men, etc. Then we'd come back to video games.

Same thing happened with the GameCube, I really had fun with the system. ( Tons of great games, Super Smash Brothers Melee FTW!) But, I never really wanted to get a GameCube, playing it at friends houses was enough for me. Not much else to say about that. I guess you could say me and Nintendo were good ol' pals.

When the Wii came out, a few of my friends got one. They had my family over and a few other families over, and we all enjoyed it. This was my dating period with the Wii. I was just kinda getting to know the wii, but I was really interested in it; the price was really appealing and it was a cute little machine. On top of that, my family really like it, so I saw a future with this thing. (hehe) After a few months of "dating" I finally bought a Wii. It was around June of 2007 when it arrived (haha mail order wife).

I could write a book about all my experience and thoughts on the Wii, but I will try to summarize it up. At first I was happily married to Nintendo, I was a loyal fanboy from about 2006-2008. During this time period I would defend Nintendo no matter what, if Nintendo committed genocide, I probably would of defended them and tried to justify their actions. Even though I was a fanboy, I was having some issues with my relationship. (thats a whole different series of blog posts though) I realized that Nintendo wasn't giving me the experience that I wanted, and the Wii lost its charm that it had in 2006.

In 2009 I got a divorce from the Wii and Nintendo, I was just so fed up with all the BS from Nintendo. I took my Wii and all the games and accessories to gamestop. (FUN FACT: I looked up how to put the wii back in the box, which was a pain in the ass cus there have been like 10 different interior wii boxes; I even kept the plastic for the wiimotes!) I got a PS3 and Little Big Planet.

I haven't looked back since that day in 09, but it still kinda has been a struggle. I had bipolar opinions about Nintendo since just a few days ago. I'm going to try to keep my comments and mind as far as possible away from the status of "fanboy".

Nintendo was a pretty big part of my childhood, but I don't get the feeling I used to get it from a generation or two ago. I respect Nintendo, and I just wanted everyone to know that. I hate a lot of the things they do, because they don't make sense to me. Like the disaster of the eShop that Jim recently wrote about. I am a PlayStation gamer now, I am not a fanboy; and that is the last thing I ever want to be. I used to be a Nintendo fanboy, and I HATED it. I just hated defending something when I knew I was the wrong one in the argument, and I hated having to tell myself that the PS3 sucked.

I don't understand how anyone can be a fanboy, how do you live? I had a "falling out" with Nintendo, but I don't bash everything they do. You don't have to game on everything to be a gamer, Nintendo (and Microsoft) just isn't for me. The best way for me to enjoy Nintendo games is when I'm at someones else house, and when I just played for a little bit at a time.

I'm not sure where the direction of this blog post went, but I hope you understand what I am trying to say. I feel like I should re-read it ten more times and fix it up. I will do that later, for now, I'm going to bed. Thanks for reading, and happy gaming :)








While I was watching the WiiU presentation at Nintendo's conference, I was extremely confused. Like everyone I wasn't sure what I was seeing, was this just a controller that hooked up to a tv? Was this a controller for the wii? What the hell is going on!

What the WiiU really was wasn't the only thing that confused me, what boggled me most was; why isn't this crap on the 3DS? From what was shown, the 3DS could do some of this alone. Then some of what they showed would work if they just had some WiiU to 3DS connectivity, meaning they wouldn't need this new controller.

Lets look back at the trailer. They started off with some adult sounding guy playing on his WiiU, then another adult sounding guy told the other guy it was time for baseball. (It was odd how they sounded similar in age, yet one guy treated the other as if he was his son) The cool thing was that they changed the channel, and the gamer continued playing Mario Bros on his WiiU screen. That was pretty cool I suppose, but why not just have the WiiU system have connectivity with the 3DS that allows for WiiU gameplay to be streamed on the 3DS screen. Still using the wiimote to play. I'm not sure if that is possible or not, but this is the only thing that I'm not sure of.

The second part of the trailer they showed a nice looking sketch of an anime figure turn into a beautiful drawing of link. The purpose of this portion of the trailer was to show that you can "Draw on the new controller." Was that really necessary to show? It's not a killer feature like switching from the TV to the controller was. Can the 3DS really not do drawings? Just have this drawing feature/application on the 3DS, no need to create this new controller when the 3DS is capable.

Then they showed two people playing a nice, simple game only on the new controller, which was odd because it made it look like a tablet now that would be portable (but it's not portable). Ok, so you can play only on this controller if you would like, but you can also only play on a 3DS (stupid statement), and the 3DS is completely portable. This seems like it COULD of been possible if Nintendo had included multi touch on the 3DS (absolutely ridiculous that the 3DS doesn't have multitouch, I mean really)
Maybe the smaller screen of the 3DS would make a two player game less enjoyable than playing in on the WiiU controller, but the 3DS is completely portable and you aren't restrained to a spot near the WiiU system. This is something that should of been included in the 3DS, but Nintendo half-assed the 3DS (debatable), and since they had missed features in the 3DS; they just added them to this new controller.

The third part is pretty interesting, the WiiU controller was used to pitch a ball and catch a ball. Using a wiimote to pitch was just fine, this doesn't seem to do anything that buttons and motion controls couldn't do before. Catching the ball (finally you can catch balls in wii sports baseball! FINALLY!) was also interesting, but again, why have a whole new controller for this? Just use a wiimote or a regular controller to catch a ball.

After baseball, they showed golf. Looked to be the same as Wii Sports golf, only, get this...you see the ball and sand on the WiiU controller? What? How does that add to the experience. That is just a stupid gimmick that doesn't add anything. Maybe if it added to the gameplay then it would be cool, not sure how it could add to gameplay in golf while laying on the floor, but if it could then it would be pretty tight. But seeing 6 inches of sand and a golf ball doesn't really add to the experience in a significant way.

Stay fit with the new controller, not really, but that is what they showed after baseball and golf. The controller itself just acted as a screen for displaying how many cookies you have eaten and how much you gained. (showed your weight hehe) So you aren't staying fit with the WiiU controller from what was shown, it just shows how the WiiU can act as an expensive scale. This would be cool if the 3DS connected with the balance board, just pull your 3DS out of your pocket and step on the balance board. That would of really been free from the TV which is also what they said in this part of the trailer.

Wii zapper time, yeah they showed the WiiU controller connected to a Wii Zapper. This is the most ridiculous part of the trailer I think. Why not just use the WiiU controller and move around the room to find targets and what not. It has motion built into it, did you forget the features of your own controller?. Why is the wii zapper involved in this, and why the nunchuck. The thing does have buttons Nintendo...

Next we saw someone swiping the touch screen to shoot ninja stars at bamboo targets on the TV. This could be done, and has been done with motion controls. (and motion controls would probably be more precise) I repeat myself again, why create a new controller for this? So that I can use a touch screen for things that have been done perfectly fine before? No thanks.

Make video calls with the new controller. (This was very awkward, and why were they not speaking English?) Seeing as you can do the same thing on 360 and PS3 with other players who own a camera, this isn't impressive, this is just playing catch up. It is cool that it is on the WiiU controller, though since this...fuck! I keep repeating myself, but I have to. Since this isn't portable, it kinda defeats the coolness. This is a feature that should be on the 3DS, and I'm pretty sure it is coming to the 3DS, right?

Browsing on the WiiU looks bad ass, no denying that. I'm not sure if any of this was real or not, I doubt it was real, but it is a cool concept. Anyway, it looks pretty cool. I liked how the WiiU controller acted as a zoom in tool for what was displayed on the screen, the touch screen was for scrolling. Even cooler was that you could swipe a video on the TV, similar to the throwing stars. It isn't really technologically advanced when you think about it, just replace the button that would make the video pop up with a swipe of the touch screen. It was still bad ass though, and I haven't really seen anything like it before.
As BA as it was, it seems like something for a tablet or a portable. A feature like this would be nice to have on the 3DS, Connect your 3DS with the WiiU and open the browser, just swipe on the 3DS and have the video pop up. So yes I'm saying it, it renders this new controller un-necessary.

Then we saw concept footage of an HD Zelda game, looked pretty, but it was no Uncharted. (like I said it was just concept) This added to the confusion even more because it said "more detail with the new controller". It should of said "more detail with the WiiU" By saying with the new controller, it seemed like the controller was just a...controller. But on to the point! I think it would be great to have a HD Zelda game, I liked how the controller displayed inventory. However having connectivity with the 3DS would mean that the 3DS could display inventory.

Having connectivity like that with the 3DS could boost sales of the system, and make more people enjoy their purchase. (a way to boost sales and increase 3DS appeal is MUCH needed due to the PS Vita releasing soon, at $249)

So while there were some interesting gimmicks, the majority of them all seemed useless and un-necessary. Having connectivity with the 3DS for things such as displaying inventory items, browsing the web, or maybe even games that give 3DS players an advantage. (whats the name of the game where one player uses a WiiU controller and has an advantage?) I don't understand the WiiU, because it doesn't make sense. It wants to be a portable but it doesn't want to be, it does things that the 3DS should do, and it does things that standard controls and motion controls have done just fine with.








So my shitty laptop decided to shutdown on me right when I was about to save a draft, I lost everything :(
No worries though, I think I remember most of what I had said :P
------------------------------

Sony has announced a new line of PS3 games, that consists of remastered PSP games. The reasons they are making this new line is because there are tons of great PSP games, but PS3 gamers who lack a PSP can't enjoy them. The new line will have updated visuals (HD BITCHES) and 3D. New content, and I assume trophies as well.

I am all for these updated PSP games, but not for them being remastered onto the PS3. My question is, why not re-master them for the NGP?

First off, the PS3 all ready has a ton of exclusives this year and quite a few planned for next year, there are also tons of great third party games. Wont these games just get lost and forgotten in this huge PS3 library orgasm? The NGP all ready has great games announced: Resistance, Killzone, Wipeout, Little Big Planet, Hot Shots Gold, etc. However, the NGP seems like it will need these PSP ports way more than the PS3. Not saying that the NGP lineup is weak, it is actually quite strong all ready, but the PS3 library really doesn't need these PSP ports at all.

Second, PSP games are, at a maximum, 1.8 GB's. NGP games can be 4 GB's at a max. So an NGP cartridge could have two big PSP games, and extras. "God of War: Ghost of Sparta" and "God of War: Chains of Olympus" would make a great collection for the NGP. The graphics are all ready quite impressive, just update them a bit, add trophies, update controls (add 2nd analog stick support), and I suppose add some new content such as skins and challenge rooms.

Blu-ray disks are 25 GB's at a minimum. That is enough space for 13.89 PSP games. But this new line of games is only including one or two PSP games on a blu-ray disk? (There is no information on weather or not these games will be digital or on a blu-ray, I am assuming they will be on a blu-ray though)

Lets use Monster Hunter Potable 3rd as an example here. That game is 1.8 GB's. That leaves 23.20 GB's of space left. Will all that space go towards updating the visuals and adding a few new things? I saw the trailer and while the graphics were good, they weren't that impressive of an update. Like most people, I don't own a 3D tv, and don't play on getting one till the prices become cheaper and the technology improves; so the 3D doesn't really matter to me.

What will these ports be offering me that will make me pick them up? Trophies? I love trophies, but not enough to buy every game that has them, hehe. What will these PS3 ports offer that REALLY matters that NGP ports couldn't offer. Based on what has been announced, they really don't offer anything.

Maybe this line would be awesome if they put ALL the Monster Hunter games for the PSP onto one Blu-Ray, and all the Metal Gear Solid PSP games onto another blu-ray. Hell, this whole rant I'm going on about the sizes of games and blu-ray disks isn't even all that relevant. The games could be digital downloads from the PS store, and this line still wouldn't make sense.

I am afraid that this line will fail, and I don't understand the logic behind it. I would understand it if the ports were for the NGP, and I want them to be, but I don't understand why they are being ported onto the PS3. I believe Sony is making a mistake here. PSP ports should be on the NGP, where they belong and are needed.








I wanted to make this blog a week or two ago, but I was too distracted by other things. (Porn for example)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know it is the start of the weekend, but I wanted to get this out of the way before I forgot. After every weekend, typically on Monday's; I get asked a simple question. "What did you do this weekend?" The answer should be simple. I should just explain to the person asking what all I did. However, this is a not so easy question for me to answer.

I usually just say something like "I didn't really do anything" or "nothing much". In reality, I do a lot of stuff, awesome stuff. I would love to tell the asker everything, but would they even care? Would they even believe me?

On the weekends I always do odd jobs. Sometimes I'm a plumber, not just any plumber though. I ride around on this dinosaur, one of the cutest things you'd ever see! I go everywhere, solving puzzles, stopping monsters, and saving princesses!
Last weekend I didn't go home. Instead, I decided to go to this festival on the coast. This sounds crazy, but I actually compete in these intense races...which take place during the apocalypse. I swear it's true! I don't just race when things are getting obliterated. Sometimes I take a stroll on a nice relaxing rode in one of my thousands of cars. I do more than racing though.
Next week I hope to be a Cop, my goal is to rank up into a detective after I solve enough murders. This will be hard for you to wrap your head around, but I'm solving cases from the 1940's. Actually, it's more like during the 1940's.
This might sound sick, but I occasionally tear up guys with my chainsaw. Don't worry though, it's for a good cause! And besides, Carmine needs my help!

Now if you haven't figured it out yet. I'm talking about video games. Even though all those bad ass things are from video games, I am still doing all them. I find video games to be the best entertainment out there, and it is what I enjoy doing most in my free time.

Like I said, I would love to tell the person asking about all the awesome things I get to do, and how fun it is; but unfortunately the person asking is not a gamer. He/she wouldn't really give a shit. He/she would act like playing video games all weekend is some joke. Why is that?

You can see a new movie, that is cool. You can get hammered drunk, that is cool. Concerts? Yep, cool too. Video games on the other hand...LOOSER. That is how the average person sees it. And it really bugs me. I didn't do just "nothing" like I tell some people.

Yeah, I game on the weekends. How is that uncool? Are people truly that ignorant? Sure I think concerts, movies, partying (people drugging out, where I live anyway) can be great fun. I do do (sounds weird) what is considered cool to do when I want to. I will go to events if I really feel like they will be fun and worth the time. If I do participate in what's "cool" I will explain what all happened. It's just that I find the most enjoyment in video games.

So I don't do nothing on my weekends.
I GAME MY HEART OUT.
I'm not embarrassed about being a gamer in any way what so ever. I just can't explain my weekends to people who aren't gamers. If they aren't gamers, they won't really understand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you ever asked the question "What did you do this weekend?" by a non-gamer, and all you did was really game, how do you usually answer it? How do you feel about the question?








I love my games, and I love my game cases! Sadly, I can't buy every game I want new. Luckily games prices change as time goes on; and if enough people buy the game, a "greatest hit" version of the game will become available. (Most game companies have a name for a best-seller, such as "Gamers Choice" for game cube games) Sure the games are half the price as the original when they are a greatest hit, but the cases themself just turn me away!

Lets look at the problems with the "Greatest Hits" cases:
-They COMPLETELY cover up the inside art of the box art, Sony has great inside box art, and the greatest hit cases completely ruin the inside
-They don't match with the clear cases, it's just odd to have a few red cases with all the other clear, it doesn't look very good
-Theres that awkward space on bluray cases, you know, where the boxart ends at the top. It's not that awkward when it's clear. But when the top is red, the box just looks miss-shaped and wrong

Why do the cases have to be red? I do not understand this at all. It is enough to put the "greatest hit" label on the boxart, that is understandable. I don't see why a case must be red though.

Though even putting the "Greatest Hits" label on box art seems kinda stupid to me. This just means Sony has to re-print a NEW version of the box art. I don't see how that can make any sense financially. Maybe it only costs a fraction of a cent more to change the box art print, but is the label really even necessary?
How about the game price is just lowered? Why does the game casing need to be raped? I truly don't understand.

Is anyone else out there like me?

PS: I find myself on ebay trying to find regular versions of the game for a good price, I truly can't stand these red ones.