surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
@Ardent Snow
It's not Naughty Dog developed.
Just like every Crash Bandicoot game since the millennium and the really shit Jak and Daxter game for the PSP.
It's not Naughty Dog developed.
Just like every Crash Bandicoot game since the millennium and the really shit Jak and Daxter game for the PSP.
@BenjaminShane
Why don't you ask your boss for a 300% pay rise because he sounds like a retard. Oh wait, I think that was just part of your sales spiel.
Why don't you ask your boss for a 300% pay rise because he sounds like a retard. Oh wait, I think that was just part of your sales spiel.
Wow! And here was I thinking that a Sony developer would say “Oh God, the Wii U renders Sony’s consoles obsolete. Time to melt down your PS3s and trade them in for scrap. No point buying a Vita, either. The Wii U way better than anything we could have imagined. I’m off to commit suicide.”
How is this news? Anyone that expected a Sony developer to do anything other than praise their company’s consoles and maintain the illusion that they aren’t worried about the competition is an idiot.
How is this news? Anyone that expected a Sony developer to do anything other than praise their company’s consoles and maintain the illusion that they aren’t worried about the competition is an idiot.
The Wii and DS could do the same "touch on the DS, see on the Wii TV" setup too. Nobody ever used it because no one was crazy enough to expect customers to buy a handheld to be used as a controller.
Well there's one thing the Nintendo has over Sony in this instance: The touch screen controller comes with the console. That makes a pretty big difference in terms software support for that type of input.
If you already own a PS3, the Vita will cost 250, it may be cheaper than the WiiU as well. Resistive screens are cheap and crappy unless you must use a stylus. Even then, there are capacitive screen styli available.
It's Nintendo, they will sell their hardware because they have all Nintendo games exclusive to them. No matter what hardware magic Sony is capable of, they'll never be Nintendo.
It's Nintendo, they will sell their hardware because they have all Nintendo games exclusive to them. No matter what hardware magic Sony is capable of, they'll never be Nintendo.
I absolutely love Naughty Dog. Even though they're a part of Sony, they can still appreciate what Nintendo has done, and admit when their skepticism is proven unnecessary.
Naughty Dog does bring up a good point. PS Vita does have a lot of the same functionality as the Wii U despite a few noticeable differences. With that said, I think Nintendo will end up finding more creative use for Wii U than Sony will for PS Vita and PS3.Naturally, Nintendo's franchise power gives it a big advantage over its competitors.
I expect Nintendo will go with a $300-350 price point for Wii U. Nintendo can still make a profit off of the hardware while keeping the price low enough to attract non-gamers and not piss off core gamers (Nintendo wouldn't be foolish to repeat Sony's $500 Ps3 mistake). Besides, Nintendo has to offer a competitive price to combat the 360 and PS3 along with their large install bases. I suppose Wii U could go as high as $400, but I think Nintendo knows the importance of affordability. 3DS was priced right but it simply did not have the right amount of software to back it up.
I expect Nintendo will go with a $300-350 price point for Wii U. Nintendo can still make a profit off of the hardware while keeping the price low enough to attract non-gamers and not piss off core gamers (Nintendo wouldn't be foolish to repeat Sony's $500 Ps3 mistake). Besides, Nintendo has to offer a competitive price to combat the 360 and PS3 along with their large install bases. I suppose Wii U could go as high as $400, but I think Nintendo knows the importance of affordability. 3DS was priced right but it simply did not have the right amount of software to back it up.
Anybody who equates this guy's statements as "trash talk" is really reaching.
"...but to be fair, last time I was sceptical of the original Wii, and look at how that did. I'm sure that the games they make for Wii U will be amazing."
"...but to be fair, last time I was sceptical of the original Wii, and look at how that did. I'm sure that the games they make for Wii U will be amazing."
Even if the Vita/PS3 is capable of doing everything the Wii U can do (on a purely technical level) and more, the question I wonder is: will developers make use of it or will they be too busy coming up with cool new ideas for the Wii U? I'm hearing a lot of developers clamoring about they could possibly do with the Wii U's tablet, but not so much about the Vita's PS3-compatibility, other than being able to share save files (which I'll bet you only get if you are a PSN+ subscriber).
And for the record, I plan on getting a Vita and not a Wii U, I just think Nintendo demands that much more attention than Sony in the gimmick-hardware department.
And for the record, I plan on getting a Vita and not a Wii U, I just think Nintendo demands that much more attention than Sony in the gimmick-hardware department.
Maybe it's just me but the fact that nintendo showed off a prototype of the Wii U at E3 everyone has to chime in with how bad an idea this was, I think i'll wait till i get my hands on the final console to see how it plays out.
There are a lot of things with the PSvita that make me say what a waist, but if i get my hands on it and it amazes me more than the psp did then i may buy one, i still think the choice between wifi and AT&T version is a joke for a handheld system especially if the games developed for it end up being ports of ps3 games or there is a lack of support for games for it like the psp.
If you look at the average amount of games released on the psp since it came out in 2004 you have roughly 8 games per month released, the ds came out around the same time and roughly you have 13-14 games released in a month, that's not to say they don't release more games one month then the other just averaging out your choices the ds has 500 more games to choose from than the psp which makes it hard for me as a consumer to want to purchase a gaming system handheld or otherwise that just doesn't have many choices.
There are a lot of things with the PSvita that make me say what a waist, but if i get my hands on it and it amazes me more than the psp did then i may buy one, i still think the choice between wifi and AT&T version is a joke for a handheld system especially if the games developed for it end up being ports of ps3 games or there is a lack of support for games for it like the psp.
If you look at the average amount of games released on the psp since it came out in 2004 you have roughly 8 games per month released, the ds came out around the same time and roughly you have 13-14 games released in a month, that's not to say they don't release more games one month then the other just averaging out your choices the ds has 500 more games to choose from than the psp which makes it hard for me as a consumer to want to purchase a gaming system handheld or otherwise that just doesn't have many choices.
He's not necessarily wrong, but I doubt we will see that many games that use both. The PSP/PS3 and DS/Wii connectivity never really took off so I'm not yet convinced that Vita & PS3 connectivity will be any different.
As for the touch screen Capacitive screens work better with fingers and can track multiple inputs, whereas resistive screens are more suited to drawing and writing as they work with styluses. Personally I'm happy Nintendo used resistive screens they feel more accurate, and I prefer to use a stylus, but that's really just personal preference.
As for the touch screen Capacitive screens work better with fingers and can track multiple inputs, whereas resistive screens are more suited to drawing and writing as they work with styluses. Personally I'm happy Nintendo used resistive screens they feel more accurate, and I prefer to use a stylus, but that's really just personal preference.
called it. i remember how the psp could stream games off the ps3. i used to play SFA3 off my ps3 onto my psp. just seems logical to take the next step and make it completely interactive with each other.
Regardless of the prices of the consolres, the most important distinction between the WiiU and the PS3/PSV link-up is that game designers can assume every single WiiU owner has the screen controller and make design choices that incorporate it, whereas the PS ones can't assume that. So any WiiU like functionality the PSV has will have to be optional, or risk leaving out anyone who doesn't own both PS systems.
Who cares!!!
Obviously all Nintendo does is reproduce updated games and systems from the 80's marketed solely for little kids.
Little kids can't afford the Wii-U So it will fail..
Sony's products are overpriced and marketed only for adults.
"Some" Adults have jobs and can afford their products.
Therefore it will out sell all Nintendo products.
BTW: I'm 12
Obviously all Nintendo does is reproduce updated games and systems from the 80's marketed solely for little kids.
Little kids can't afford the Wii-U So it will fail..
Sony's products are overpriced and marketed only for adults.
"Some" Adults have jobs and can afford their products.
Therefore it will out sell all Nintendo products.
BTW: I'm 12
At least the guys at Naughty Dog didn't just come right out and say that PS3 and PSVita do what Nintendon't.
That didn't work out too well for the last guys who said that so it's easy to see why they avoided that(beside it just being poor form).
That didn't work out too well for the last guys who said that so it's easy to see why they avoided that(beside it just being poor form).
fuck yeah it does, it does even more!!. i dont know what nintendo were thinking when they put all those "inovative ideas" on the wiiu.
Nintendo deliberately makes half-efforts with its hardware because they think half-efforts are enough effort. Nintendo is a cross between penny-pinching, egotistical, and oblivious to the world around them.
it does everything you just have to pay 300 bucks for a ps3 and 250 for the vita and play less powerful games than the wiiU ones,lol, 550 US DOLLARS...just like 5 years ago XD
Does every PS3 come with a Vita and is every PS3 game from now on using Vita support? No? Well see Wii-U every game will have the support. very few developers will take advantage of the Vita/Ps3 hookup.
Nintendo gave some really shitty excuse for the lack of multi-touch, but it more than likely won't matter. People aren't going to want to use the damn tablet and developers will start to do away with it before it even catches on.
I'm not really surprised about this statement. Haters will hate, and the world keeps moving. Also, the WiiU is an all-in-one system, so it will be definitely be cheaper altogether, unless one already owns a PS3 (which I don't).
Lastly,since everyone is talking about it, what is the advantage to a multitouch compared to a single touch screen? What are possible the applications of a multitouch screen?
Lastly,since everyone is talking about it, what is the advantage to a multitouch compared to a single touch screen? What are possible the applications of a multitouch screen?
jawshoeuh
"Anybody who equates this guy's statements as "trash talk" is really reaching."
He's just trying to legitimize hit comments by making the concession of the Wii's success DESPITE his own previous derision of it, but make no mistake, this is trash talk.
"Anybody who equates this guy's statements as "trash talk" is really reaching."
He's just trying to legitimize hit comments by making the concession of the Wii's success DESPITE his own previous derision of it, but make no mistake, this is trash talk.
@Masaji1223
It can do pinch zoom!!... But yeah, that's about it.
I personally think the stylus is A LOT more comfortable and accurate then using your fingers. I don't care if they are using a single-touch screen because of pricing or because they truly think it's better this way, i'm happy with their decision.
Now let's hope that the console supports more then one tablet at the same time. To me, split-screen multiplayer is the ONLY REASON to have screens on the controller.
It can do pinch zoom!!... But yeah, that's about it.
I personally think the stylus is A LOT more comfortable and accurate then using your fingers. I don't care if they are using a single-touch screen because of pricing or because they truly think it's better this way, i'm happy with their decision.
Now let's hope that the console supports more then one tablet at the same time. To me, split-screen multiplayer is the ONLY REASON to have screens on the controller.
On price: People say the Wii-U is "an all-in-one system" and "in one piece." I defy you to show me a Nintendo system that didn't at least try to get you to buy more peripherals that just get used with a very small subset of games.
Sorry, but just because the Vita is another system that, should you happen to buy it, has potential to add functionality and the Wii-U has that functionality built in doesn't automatically make it the cheaper choice, even if the price of entry is lower or equal.
On touch screens: While resistive may be "more accurate" it's usually because of the use of a stylus (generally, the same surface area for detection) compared to a finger (which has a much larger surface area for detection) being used on capacitive screens. The fact that it isn't multitouch capable pretty much means that it's not multitouch capable. Who cares? It IS capable of delivering at least a DS-like gameplay experience, which developers already know how to make. It's a safe move, but one I personally don't approve of.
On games: Nintendo first party fails to interest me these days. I would just like to see something new from them that invokes their creativity and gameplay into a new world and IP, then I might be excited.
Vita has a few titles that I'm excited for, but I'm sort of waiting to see how these crossplay titles will work from a purchasing standpoint and if PSP Remasters will follow a similar pricing scheme.
On trash talk: I don't feel like it's trash talk, since he's stating things as he knows them, likely going on an assumption that resistive screens can't be multitouch. Resistive touch pads can, despite common belief, be multi-touch capable, but creating it with such features may negate the cost savings aspect of resistive screens and I'm not sure the MT detection is all that great anyway.
On speculation: everything we've seen from both offerings is a test implementation. We can't say for sure how well the Wii-U's controller streams yet, nor can we say how well Vita's abilities will play out. We also don't know little things like battery life for either one. (Being a wireless controller and all... it has batteries) What we can say is that, technically... he's right. It's got odd design choices that don't make sense out of context, as did the Wii. The Vita and PS3 have the capability to do what it does, too... He never made claims of "better" and it's likely the all-powerful Sony-exclusive FIRMWARE UPDATE sequels and spinoffs will be on the Vita to expand its abilities.
Or I just type too much. Yeah, that.
Sorry, but just because the Vita is another system that, should you happen to buy it, has potential to add functionality and the Wii-U has that functionality built in doesn't automatically make it the cheaper choice, even if the price of entry is lower or equal.
On touch screens: While resistive may be "more accurate" it's usually because of the use of a stylus (generally, the same surface area for detection) compared to a finger (which has a much larger surface area for detection) being used on capacitive screens. The fact that it isn't multitouch capable pretty much means that it's not multitouch capable. Who cares? It IS capable of delivering at least a DS-like gameplay experience, which developers already know how to make. It's a safe move, but one I personally don't approve of.
On games: Nintendo first party fails to interest me these days. I would just like to see something new from them that invokes their creativity and gameplay into a new world and IP, then I might be excited.
Vita has a few titles that I'm excited for, but I'm sort of waiting to see how these crossplay titles will work from a purchasing standpoint and if PSP Remasters will follow a similar pricing scheme.
On trash talk: I don't feel like it's trash talk, since he's stating things as he knows them, likely going on an assumption that resistive screens can't be multitouch. Resistive touch pads can, despite common belief, be multi-touch capable, but creating it with such features may negate the cost savings aspect of resistive screens and I'm not sure the MT detection is all that great anyway.
On speculation: everything we've seen from both offerings is a test implementation. We can't say for sure how well the Wii-U's controller streams yet, nor can we say how well Vita's abilities will play out. We also don't know little things like battery life for either one. (Being a wireless controller and all... it has batteries) What we can say is that, technically... he's right. It's got odd design choices that don't make sense out of context, as did the Wii. The Vita and PS3 have the capability to do what it does, too... He never made claims of "better" and it's likely the all-powerful Sony-exclusive FIRMWARE UPDATE sequels and spinoffs will be on the Vita to expand its abilities.
Or I just type too much. Yeah, that.
I'm fine with the screen not being mult-touch as long as the Wii U launches at $300 or less.
Even that will be too much for most people.
Even that will be too much for most people.
While I have no doubt the PS3 and PS Vita could possibly do the same thing the Wii U could do here's the problem, the PS3 and Vita are two separate systems while WiiU is one. That alone helps Nintendo's position on buying the system.
Next is how complex will the integration between the Ps3 and Vita be? Also since the Vita is launching in the middle if not the beginning of the end of Ps3's life cycle what about it's integration with the Ps4?
Also what about third party support? Will sony or nintendo have more or less next time around?
Then there's the matter of development cost, how much will it cost to do Ps3 and Vita connection versus Wii U connection. What about Ps4 and Vita connection too?
I'm sorry Naughty Dog but your statements are about as valid as a super bowl prediction made after the end of a couple of scrimmage games. There's just to much time between now and the end of 2012 to make such assessments on a system that has yet to prove it's self beyond a couple of tech demos.
Next is how complex will the integration between the Ps3 and Vita be? Also since the Vita is launching in the middle if not the beginning of the end of Ps3's life cycle what about it's integration with the Ps4?
Also what about third party support? Will sony or nintendo have more or less next time around?
Then there's the matter of development cost, how much will it cost to do Ps3 and Vita connection versus Wii U connection. What about Ps4 and Vita connection too?
I'm sorry Naughty Dog but your statements are about as valid as a super bowl prediction made after the end of a couple of scrimmage games. There's just to much time between now and the end of 2012 to make such assessments on a system that has yet to prove it's self beyond a couple of tech demos.
Unless the Vita comes bundles with the PS3 this is a pretty idiotic comparison. Sure, in theory they can do most of the same things, but you can't ever assume a PS3 owner actually HAS a vita, and vice versa. Games using PS3-Vita compatibility to the degree the WiiU will will be niche at best.
I dunno, Nintendo has a few games that assume you have their portable... they seemed to do alright considering they were on the cube...
I figure as long as its done right, it can only be a good thing that two systems purchased for different reasons would have interactivity. Hell, Id love for my coffee machine to tell my toaster to go so id have a perfectly timed warm bagel with my morning coffee...
I figure as long as its done right, it can only be a good thing that two systems purchased for different reasons would have interactivity. Hell, Id love for my coffee machine to tell my toaster to go so id have a perfectly timed warm bagel with my morning coffee...
My guess is that he made that comment with people who already own a PS3 in mind.
After all he does work at Naughty Dog so I assume he already owns a PS3.
Either way I'm keeping my eye on the Wii U. If it ends up being an worthwhile upgrade from the PS3-360 I'll pick one up.
I already own a PS3, and plan on picking up the PSV day one so cost really isn't an issue for me.
After all he does work at Naughty Dog so I assume he already owns a PS3.
Either way I'm keeping my eye on the Wii U. If it ends up being an worthwhile upgrade from the PS3-360 I'll pick one up.
I already own a PS3, and plan on picking up the PSV day one so cost really isn't an issue for me.
I'm not totally sure about this (because I don't own one), but I don't believe that multi-touch screens in their current form support stylus usage. With a resistive touch screen you can use a stylus for more precise control, granted with only one point being pressed at a time; so if there is a full set of buttons on the controller it would be better to use a resistive touch screen than a capacitive one. I hear that Fujitsu is making resistive multi-touch screens, but they are probably more expensive than either other type.
lololol wasnt sony downplaying the console portable conection
Shuhei Yoshida over at sony hadn't even thought of that possibility before the Wii U
"Already people are starting to ask about linking Vita and PS3 to do something similar, in terms of using two screens, and having controls on the screen," he said. "That's very interesting, and we will have to experiment."
PS move all over again
Shuhei Yoshida over at sony hadn't even thought of that possibility before the Wii U
"Already people are starting to ask about linking Vita and PS3 to do something similar, in terms of using two screens, and having controls on the screen," he said. "That's very interesting, and we will have to experiment."
PS move all over again
@Jonathan Holmes
I still don't understand why nintendo fanboys are so quick to just settle for this shit. Why can't you people realize that it's just not cool what they have been doing to gamers for quite some time now, and on so many fronts.
What I understand even less is the Nintendo geeks (not necessarily the person im responding to) who go out of their way not only to defend Nintendo jacked decisions in rehashing old IP, failure to introduce new IP or to publish great IP properly, overcharging for hardware, etc. but to actually defend those choices (thus allowing it to continue unchecked) and create delusional reasons to bash others.
Out of all the fanboys, Nintendo fanboys are by far the worst. And it's the same on any thread, forum or blog post. Their thoughts and reasoning is just so far off base it's moved beyond funny and all I can do is shake my head at this point.
I still don't understand why nintendo fanboys are so quick to just settle for this shit. Why can't you people realize that it's just not cool what they have been doing to gamers for quite some time now, and on so many fronts.
What I understand even less is the Nintendo geeks (not necessarily the person im responding to) who go out of their way not only to defend Nintendo jacked decisions in rehashing old IP, failure to introduce new IP or to publish great IP properly, overcharging for hardware, etc. but to actually defend those choices (thus allowing it to continue unchecked) and create delusional reasons to bash others.
Out of all the fanboys, Nintendo fanboys are by far the worst. And it's the same on any thread, forum or blog post. Their thoughts and reasoning is just so far off base it's moved beyond funny and all I can do is shake my head at this point.
The one point that people seem to miss is that every Wii u comes with this controller. Which means most games will implement the features with the expectation that everyone who buys there game will use it. If a developer takes the time and money to implement vita to PS3 features there is no guarantee that there investment will pay any dividends. Just look at the Wii vs PS move. Which is why Microsoft is pushing so hard on Kinect being in every game. Ill also wager they are spending a pretty penny out to devs to make it a relevant feature and not an obscure add-on. ie Wii balance board PS move PSP remote play etc . If Sony invests then maybe otherwise nothing to see here.
The man is a little bias, and also misleading.
1. The Wii U doesn't use multi-touch, because it doesn't NEED it, those screens are more EXPENSIVE, and they aren't as ACCURATE overall and don't work well with a stylus. Multi-touch is not necessarily BETTER due to those limitations.
The iPhone needs multi-touch because you are using your fingers, the Wii U doesn't because it has buttons.
2. The PSVita obviously can't do what the Wii U can do. It can't stream games and provide functionality (like a HUD, leaving the main screen clear) instantly for example. The potential the Wii U controller had for isometric multiplayer and augmenting current games is very fresh.
3. The PS3 doesn't work with every Nintendo peripheral known to man.
4. We don't really know the technical abilities of the Wii U other than it's most likely stronger than current consoles (as that's what the majority of developer opinions attest to), there is also potential in that area. The PS3 can't run Crysis 1 for example, and even Crysis 2 chugs.
1. The Wii U doesn't use multi-touch, because it doesn't NEED it, those screens are more EXPENSIVE, and they aren't as ACCURATE overall and don't work well with a stylus. Multi-touch is not necessarily BETTER due to those limitations.
The iPhone needs multi-touch because you are using your fingers, the Wii U doesn't because it has buttons.
2. The PSVita obviously can't do what the Wii U can do. It can't stream games and provide functionality (like a HUD, leaving the main screen clear) instantly for example. The potential the Wii U controller had for isometric multiplayer and augmenting current games is very fresh.
3. The PS3 doesn't work with every Nintendo peripheral known to man.
4. We don't really know the technical abilities of the Wii U other than it's most likely stronger than current consoles (as that's what the majority of developer opinions attest to), there is also potential in that area. The PS3 can't run Crysis 1 for example, and even Crysis 2 chugs.
Here's the problem - with the Wii U, the second screen is integrated on every controller, meaning that developers will make use of it. With the PS3/Vita interfunctionality, not every PS3 owner will have a Vita so this means developers would be spending more resources to develop features that only a portion of the games buyers would use. Maybe if we're lucky they'll take the similarities into account with cross platform games, and use them on the PS3 as well. And PS3 exclusives will be "encouraged" by Sony to make use these features.
The Wii U is a complete system built from the ground up for it's tablet support. The Vita is a separate system, it's current base would already have to own a PS3. There may be consumers that own just a Vita, not a PS3. This would be a fragmented market and wouldn't be as safe as a bet as developing titles that support the tablet as it would for the Wii U. It doesn't matter what option is cheaper.... if you have a PS3, I'm sure Vita would be cheaper than the Wii U. If you have neither, the PS3 + Vita combo will surely be more expensive to invest in. Sony would be the main supporter of the connectivity, like with Move, because of the fragmented user base.
"I wonder if Nintendo deliberately makes half-efforts with its hardware, just to be a dick."
Yes they do.
That and their cheap as fuck.
Dur, let's make a big touch screen. Multitouch? Narp, let's just use DS tech.
Yes they do.
That and their cheap as fuck.
Dur, let's make a big touch screen. Multitouch? Narp, let's just use DS tech.
I paid $32.67 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff,
BidsOut. com
BidsOut. com
follow
