alanschu Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Also a possibility. In fact, I'm sure it's already happening! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 That'll work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 (edited) Diablo would be the lesser of the two, but I don't think it's too significant of a minority that feels JRPG games are not RPG games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It doesn't really matter, is the point. The term "RPG" is so darn difficult to define and even as we argue right here (and hi-jacking the original thread) this very SAME topic over and over and over again we can't ever reach a consensus on what an RPG really is. Although, I might think JRPGs really aren't RPGs,you might turn around and say they are... As someone has stated on an earlier thread, What an RPG is, depends on the eye of the beholder (no pun intended). Edited February 6, 2006 by Lancer Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 OMG Eye of the Beholder is the defining RPG!!! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 OMG Eye of the Beholder is the defining RPG!!! :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It sure is! Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The term "RPG" is so darn difficult to define and even as we argue right here (and hi-jacking the original thread) this very SAME topic over and over and over again we can't ever reach a consensus on what an RPG really is. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I blame those pesky Tachyon RPG Elements contaminating games and game debates from the future. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weiser_Cain Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I'm back in the consule market for the revolution. That controller is awesome. My computer still beats all systems, nintendo just gave me another reason to want the system. Yaw devs, Yaw!!! ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haitoku Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 @ Lancer I guess you make some valid points. I thought the SNES had a much stronger line-up though. Not only that, but it had everything the PC didn't at the time. I don't buy consoles to play watered down PC-style games in general (same reason I don't buy an Xbox). Sega did have some awsome stuff though (Lunar II is one of the best RPGs I've ever played). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedihuh? Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 Ive already bought my system if I have an extra 1200 or so lying around when ps3 comes out maybe i'll pick it up. (i never have that much money) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGwar Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 360 is definatelty worth getting fired over. and also RPG is a very big group. that is why it has become a two word catgory. like action rpg or FPSRPG or adventure rpg or pen and paper and such Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oerwinde Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 http://megagames.com/news/html/console/ps3...evelopers.shtml ::Shrug:: Take it for what it is... Interesting. Megagames aren't very far up my trust-list (if I had one..), but it's still fun to read some differing views on the accessibility of the CELL and its SPU's. Too many people claim that it's impossible (or near at least) to write code for, but seldom does anyone have any direct contact with the beast. I read somewhere that over 4000 devkits for the Playstation 3 had been shipped.. I wonder where they all went? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The thing is that all the people claiming that the PS3 was hard to develop for were people who either A) Assumed that the PS3 was hard to develop for because it used a new processor architecture, they had no other information than that, or B) Worked for Microsoft. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGwar Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 face it, the ps3 is a grill with a boomerang controller and a disk drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oerwinde Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 face it, the ps3 is a grill with a boomerang controller and a disk drive. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That can play HD movies for 500-1000 less than a stand alone player :D The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haitoku Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 (edited) face it, the ps3 is a grill with a boomerang controller and a disk drive. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, just no. What makes you like the Xbox 360 so much? Being able to play watered down PC style games? Edited February 7, 2006 by Haitoku Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 (edited) @ Lancer I guess you make some valid points. I thought the SNES had a much stronger line-up though. Not only that, but it had everything the PC didn't at the time. I don't buy consoles to play watered down PC-style games in general (same reason I don't buy an Xbox). That's exactly the point I wanted to make in this thread before getting sidetracked.... Will the X-Box360 (or PS3) have a good lineup of quality PC-style games or not? If one of those two will have PC-style RPGS in particular, then I am getting it. If both are making nothing more than JRPGS than I don't care about either. The Genesis was the last console that catered to the PC RPG gamer crowd, and there hasn't been another console like it ever since. Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haitoku Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 @ Lancer I guess you make some valid points. I thought the SNES had a much stronger line-up though. Not only that, but it had everything the PC didn't at the time. I don't buy consoles to play watered down PC-style games in general (same reason I don't buy an Xbox). That's exactly the point I wanted to make in this thread before getting sidetracked.... Will the X-Box360 (or PS3) have quality PC-style games or not? If one of those two will have PC-style RPGS in particular, then I am getting it. No more JRPGs for this gamer. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No question about it man, the Xbox 360 will have those PC Style RPGs you are looking for. Will they be quality? That depends if you believe there can be quality PC style RPGs with the limitations of a console and controller. As for me, I don't nearly enjoy CRPGs as much as others on this forum does. The ones I truly enjoy will be on the PC in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 No question about it man, the Xbox 360 will have those PC Style RPGs you are looking for. Will they be quality? That depends if you believe there can be quality PC style RPGs with the limitations of a console and controller. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The Genesis had quality PC-style RPGs that rivaled those of the PC at the time. In fact, games like Warriors of the Eternal Sun and Buck Rogers were arguably of even higher calibur than the equivalent Gold Box games on the PC. When I say PC-style RPGs I mean will there be games like Baldur's Gate (not Dark Alliance!), Fallout, KOTOR, and although I'd be asking too much here.. Planescape Torment on the X-Box 360? Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haitoku Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 When I say PC-style RPGs I mean will there be games like Baldur's Gate (not Dark Alliance!), Fallout, KOTOR, and although I'd be asking too much here.. Planescape Torment on the X-Box 360? ermm.gif KOTOR possibly... The days of games like Torment and Fallout (never played Baldur's Gate) are over I think. Xbox 360 has Oblivion though... though I don't find Bethesda's work all that great (in fact, I think it sucks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 (edited) When I say PC-style RPGs I mean will there be games like Baldur's Gate (not Dark Alliance!), Fallout, KOTOR, and although I'd be asking too much here.. Planescape Torment on the X-Box 360? ermm.gif KOTOR possibly... The days of games like Torment and Fallout (never played Baldur's Gate) are over I think. Xbox 360 has Oblivion though... though I don't find Bethesda's work all that great (in fact, I think it sucks). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh.. Don't be so pessimistic! I really hope against hope that ain't true.. But who am I joking? I am not a fan of the Elder Scroll series either. Lately, I have been getting my RPG fix through www.spidweb.com They may not have top-of-the-line graphics and super high production costs, but their games are great where it matters: story and gameplay. Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angshuman Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 The thing is that all the people claiming that the PS3 was hard to develop for were people who either A) Assumed that the PS3 was hard to develop for because it used a new processor architecture, they had no other information than that, or B) Worked for Microsoft. Unless Sony has developed a bunch of fantastic dev kits and a collection of magical libraries and compilers that abstract out the array of SPUs somehow, it seems very likely that the PS3 is a lot harder to program for. It's not because it used a new processor architecture, it's because of what that architecture looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 From what I've heard, Sony isn't very developer friendly as far as tools go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreKOTORplz Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 If Sony wants to project an image of being more developer-friendly, it might help to actually support 1st party developers. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i thought sony had the edge with 1st parties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oerwinde Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 The thing is that all the people claiming that the PS3 was hard to develop for were people who either A) Assumed that the PS3 was hard to develop for because it used a new processor architecture, they had no other information than that, or B) Worked for Microsoft. Unless Sony has developed a bunch of fantastic dev kits and a collection of magical libraries and compilers that abstract out the array of SPUs somehow, it seems very likely that the PS3 is a lot harder to program for. It's not because it used a new processor architecture, it's because of what that architecture looks like. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did anyone read that article posted earlier that said its almost no different from writing code for a multi-core PC processor? Which is what the 360 is. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 The thing is that all the people claiming that the PS3 was hard to develop for were people who either A) Assumed that the PS3 was hard to develop for because it used a new processor architecture, they had no other information than that, or B) Worked for Microsoft. Unless Sony has developed a bunch of fantastic dev kits and a collection of magical libraries and compilers that abstract out the array of SPUs somehow, it seems very likely that the PS3 is a lot harder to program for. It's not because it used a new processor architecture, it's because of what that architecture looks like. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And I've heard that the XBOX 360 isn't much better. In order to fully utilize it, you'll still need to take advantage of multiple processors and multiple threads. From what I understand, once you start getting that working well, it doesn't matter so much if you're going from 2 to 20. I'm not convinced that it's so much easier to get working with 3 as apposed to 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedihuh? Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 wow this conversation throws me back to october/november with the 360 hype and the ps3 and xbox fanbois. when it comes down to it they will both be great consoles. who buys which one depends on that persons likes and tastes, you guys can argue over it all you want. it is and they are both going to be good consoles. as for PC...well its PC its untouchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now