Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

e3 2008 thread

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,400 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    It is not EA so I am not too worried about the multi-platform release. Has anyone ever played the previous Fallouts? What systems were they on?


  • Options
    #33
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    noodler wrote: »
    It is not EA so I am not too worried about the multi-platform release. Has anyone ever played the previous Fallouts? What systems were they on?

    They were on the PC. Some of the best games ever made...

    *wipes tear from eye in fond remembrance*


  • Options
    #34
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,400 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Is it fair to say they were more RPG-like on the PC than FPS which F3 looks?

    Are we talking 2D or what? Il look up some screens actually.


  • Options
    #35
    robby^5
    Registered Users Posts: 1,969 ✭✭✭robby^5


    Kiith wrote: »
    Any big pc news at the show? I saw some Spore and Dragon Age trailers, but that seemed to be it. And any sign of Alan Wake?

    Lots of Dawn of War II news, such as it being on Games for Windows LIVE service (for free) which is awesome because Dawn of War was plagued my horrible multiplayer issues with gamespy.

    Other than that there was a new CGI trailer for Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising and a little news on the new Civilization IV expansion.

    Pretty poor showing from the PC camp, but really E3 has become about the big three battling it out for console dominance.


  • Options
    #36
    Nailz
    Registered Users Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭Nailz


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Well technically it's the lead console for the kind of games they release.
    No, technically they have more games, it's all a matter of taste.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    noodler wrote:
    Is it fair to say they were more RPG-like on the PC than FPS which F3 looks?

    Are we talking 2D or what? Il look up some screens actually.
    They were very different to the new one. They were top down view games with turn-based combat. The new one so far looks more like a shooter, where as the originals were very story based with many ways to avoid combat.

    Not fully sure the humour will carry over well to this one as there was a lot of talking in the old ones. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think I'll have to re-install it when I get home.


  • Options
    #38
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    robby^5 wrote: »
    Pretty poor showing from the PC camp, but really E3 has become about the big three battling it out for console dominance.

    But it's not too bad since a large amount of the games advertised are coming out on PC as well, they're just not advertised as such.


  • Options
    #39
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    Nailz wrote: »
    No, technically they have more games, it's all a matter of taste.

    I meant technically in terms of units sold.


  • Options
    #40
    Telgere
    Registered Users Posts: 317 ✭✭Telgere


    Looks impresseive.

    http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36503.html


  • Options
    #41
    Nailz
    Registered Users Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭Nailz


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    I meant technically in terms of units sold.
    Okay fair enough, but it costs less than the PS3, and a roported 1/3 of units sold had to be sent back to Microsoft on warranty, and therefore they're losing money on repairs and sometimes compo (as a few had to be sent new consoles). So there is no guarantee that Microsoft are making better net out of Xbox than Sony are on PlayStation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    i_am_dogboy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭i_am_dogboy


    humanji wrote: »
    They were very different to the new one. They were top down view games with turn-based combat. The new one so far looks more like a shooter, where as the originals were very story based with many ways to avoid combat.

    With luck the videos shown have simply been made to appease the crowd rather than actually show off the game, and number 3 will be as dialogue and humour rich as the original two. If I was demo-ing at e3 I wouldn't want to be just showing off witty dialoge trees...I don't think a top down rpg would suffice today for anything more than a cult following anyway, gameplay appears to have moved on somewhat.

    And it's good to see dogmeat.


  • Options
    #43
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    Nailz wrote: »
    Okay fair enough, but it costs less than the PS3, and a roported 1/3 of units sold had to be sent back to Microsoft on warranty, and therefore they're losing money on repairs and sometimes compo (as a few had to be sent new consoles). So there is no guarantee that Microsoft are making better net out of Xbox than Sony are on PlayStation.

    Yes but in my oversimplified original idea the 'leading console' is the one that the most number of said console are currently sitting on peoples desks. It has nothing to do with profit, both Sony and Microsoft have posted massive losses in their gaming divisions in the last few years.


  • Options
    #44
    EdgarAllenPoo
    Registered Users Posts: 2,686 ✭✭✭EdgarAllenPoo


    It probably makes me sad and juvenile but I was pleased to hear the announcement of the new South Park game for the XBOX 360.


  • Options
    #45
    Spear
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Help & Feedback Category Moderators Posts: 25,322 CMod ✭✭✭✭Spear


    Here's the HD version of the DoW2 E3 cinematic.

    http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36579.html


  • Options
    #46
    Nailz
    Registered Users Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭Nailz


    Jack Sheehan wrote: »
    Yes but in my oversimplified original idea the 'leading console' is the one that the most number of said console are currently sitting on peoples desks. It has nothing to do with profit, both Sony and Microsoft have posted massive losses in their gaming divisions in the last few years.
    I reckon thats a simple but right way of looking at it. Oddly, according to Lockergnome, the PS3 beats the 360 month-by-month in console sales, but the fact that the 360 was releast earlier means that they have more units sold over all. Linky.

    But as it's beating it every month, I'd imagine Sony's catching up.


  • Options
    #47
    Jack Sheehan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Jack Sheehan


    True, the PS3 has made up a lot of gorund in recent months and in the end could well sell more than the 360. Sony have a longer term plan for the PS3 than Microsoft have for the 360.


  • Options
    #48
    Nailz
    Registered Users Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭Nailz


    Yes is right, I remember seeing some ubsurd idea on Playr that Microsoft were planning a new console for 2010 Q4. Stupid IMO.


  • Options
    #49
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    Nailz wrote: »
    Yes is right, I remember seeing some ubsurd idea on Playr that Microsoft were planning a new console for 2010 Q4. Stupid IMO.
    That'd be 5 years after the release of the 360 which is around the standard between generations. Can't see any of the companies releasing much later than that.


  • Options
    #50
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,400 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Ah I can. 360 and PS3 are still in their relative infancy.

    The gaps between consoles seems to b getting bigger.


  • Options
    #51
    Nailz
    Registered Users Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭Nailz


    I was 5 years between these 2 generations, it doesn't relatively mean they're going to release the next one on the same time scale. The time between the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 was 7 years, I reckon it should be longer than that this time as, like noodler said, they're still going strong and it's going to be harder to create the software to build on these particular ones.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    mcgovern
    Registered Users Posts: 4,267 ✭✭✭mcgovern


    Nailz wrote: »
    I was 5 years between these 2 generations, it doesn't relatively mean they're going to release the next one on the same time scale. The time between the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 was 7 years, I reckon it should be longer than that this time as, like noodler said, they're still going strong and it's going to be harder to create the software to build on these particular ones.

    If they want to compete with PCs, then the gaps will need to get shorter, not longer.
    And these days, people want their console to be able to play the best games and look as good as a PC.
    2010 might be a big early, but it won't be long afterwards before Microsoft at least bring out a new console. Sony will probably also realise that the market that bought PS2s by the bucketload when it was cheap near the end of its lifecycle, now have Wiis instead, and bring out a new console to stay competing with MS.


  • Options
    #53
    FreeOSCAR
    Registered Users Posts: 1,415 ✭✭✭FreeOSCAR


    Nailz wrote: »
    I reckon thats a simple but right way of looking at it. Oddly, according to Lockergnome, the PS3 beats the 360 month-by-month in console sales, but the fact that the 360 was releast earlier means that they have more units sold over all. Linky.

    But as it's beating it every month, I'd imagine Sony's catching up.

    The 360 usually beats the PS3 in the UK each and week and in North America. As for the rest of the world, the PS3 sees better sales. Cant speak for Ireland as I dont know. I think they include it in others. You can see it up on www.vgchartz.com

    And your correct that Sony is catching up and will probably overtake the 360 some time early 09 if it keeps the pace up. Microsoft on the other hand have tremendous software sales where the PS3's bar their exclusives, fifa/pes, GTA and COD4 are pretty poor.

    This is all according to VGChartz now.


  • Options
    #54
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    Nailz wrote: »
    The time between the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 was 7 years,
    5 Years

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2


  • Options
    #55
    MOH
    Registered Users Posts: 6,465 ✭✭✭MOH


    mcgovern wrote: »
    If they want to compete with PCs, then the gaps will need to get shorter, not longer.

    But with a PC you can upgrade piecemeal, get a new gfx card, buy new memory, etc.
    Whereas people aren't going to buy a new console every 3 years, knowing they'll need to buy a whole new box in another 3 years.


  • Options
    #56
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,400 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    FreeOSCAR wrote: »
    The 360 usually beats the PS3 in the UK each and week and in North America. As for the rest of the world, the PS3 sees better sales. Cant speak for Ireland as I dont know. I think they include it in others. You can see it up on www.vgchartz.com

    And your correct that Sony is catching up and will probably overtake the 360 some time early 09 if it keeps the pace up. Microsoft on the other hand have tremendous software sales where the PS3's bar their exclusives, fifa/pes, GTA and COD4 are pretty poor.

    This is all according to VGChartz now.


    On that site though, aren't they all total sales? (showing btw that ps3 is not only 5m behind 360) rather than recent growth rates?

    Wii sales, I know it is a toy rather than a games console, but still kudos Nintendo even if I absolutely don't want one


  • Options
    #57
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    noodler wrote: »
    Wii sales, I know it is a toy rather than a games console
    How is it any less a games console than the rest?


  • Options
    #58
    madrab
    Registered Users Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭madrab


    What happened to the Bungie countdown thingy?


  • Options
    #59
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    They were told to delay it by their publishers.


  • Options
    #60
    thelordofcheese
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭thelordofcheese


    Ciaran500 wrote: »
    How is it any less a games console than the rest?

    Not enough bloom and games with a pallet of greyish-brown.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    noodler
    Registered Users Posts: 26,400 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Ciaran500 wrote: »
    How is it any less a games console than the rest?


    Well it is of course my opinion. The reason I feel that way is that, and again I worked in an xtra-vision for a while so I am not saying this without ANY backup, the people who bought either the DS or Wii were made up of a large proportion of women or very young kids, usually buying one game like sports or whatever and planning to use it for say XMAS day or some other party in the case of the older customers. Similiar to the Buzz craze in many ways. They didn't strike me as people who would ever buy another game for it that didn't have some sort of communal pull.

    Also, there are many games I think the Wii just could not do well with a motion sensor controller and the like. I wouldn't want to play an Rpg, a rpo evo, or a MGS (for example) on it.

    Again tho, just an opinion.


Advertisement