Xbox One Reveal

[babaganoosh13]

 

I think XP and Dosbox caused me to suppress all of that. I remember being proud of having around 610K of available conventional memory while running Win95 back in the day while still having access to everything in DOS mode.

 

Now, it's almost all Greek to me. I can't remember what rem does, or what UMB is. God only knows what were to happen if I loaded up Turbo Pascal or Q/Watcom/Visual Basic (probably nothing.) Guess I should take a refresher.

"rem" denotes a comment, i.e. the text that follows is not executed, I assume it's short for remark. Handy so you don't have to remember and retype the various changes you need to make from game to game.

 

UMBs are just the bits of memory originally reserved for various specialised functions that had mostly become redundant in later times, and therefore the memory was 'reclaimed' for general use.

 

Merci, beau coup.

 

Now I remEMBER!

 

I think it has easily been over 13 years since I've had to do any of that. I don't miss it.

[Mamoulian War]

Not that I know. Though maybe sometimes it wouldn't fit in high memory and defaults back to conventional memory since it's usually loaded last? If expanded memory isn't required, the NOEMS option results in a bit more memory for stuff like the mouse driver.

 

That said, if something had to be sacrificed to free more memory, DOSKEY was probably the first to go.

 

yes that is correct, anything that did't fit into UMB was loaded back into the conventional memory. You just had to change some stuff and do few reboots to get the best results, especially if you had only 1024 kB RAM on first 386SX computers...

 

Unfortunately I do not remember if it was possible to do all this stuff with 286 computers.

[Monte Carlo]

Anyhoo, everyone's favourite gaming executive, Don 'Deal With It' Mattrick is leaving M$ and going to Zynga. Don used to work at EA. If I worked at Zynga and was told that the new CEO was ex-EA and M$ I'd feel like a Turkic nomad who'd just heard the news that Ghenghis Khan was hiding over the next hill.

 

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/07/01/don-mattrick-named-zynga-s-new-ceo/

 

Edit: I don't know if his masterful handling of the XBoxOne debacle had something to do with this. But it should have.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Monte Carlo

[Nepenthe]

Anyhoo, everyone's favourite gaming executive, Don 'Deal With It' Mattrick is leaving M$ and going to Zynga. Don used to work at EA. If I worked at Zynga and was told that the new CEO was ex-EA and M$ I'd feel like a Turkic nomad who'd just heard the news that Ghenghis Khan was hiding over the next hill.

 

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/07/01/don-mattrick-named-zynga-s-new-ceo/

 

Edit: I don't know if his masterful handling of the XBoxOne debacle had something to do with this. But it should have.

 

"Mattrick was best known at EA for having helped bring to life such celebrated game franchises as Need for Speed, Harry Potter and The Sims." Also apparently the guy behind ramming Kinect down our throats. Seems like a perfect fit for Zynga.

[HoonDing]

Then the only thing going against it will be all the bad will they got from the crap they tried to pull.

People already forgot.

 

[Nordicus]

"Mattrick was best known at EA for having helped bring to life such celebrated game franchises as Need for Speed, Harry Potter and The Sims."

If Mattrick brought life to the Harry Potter movie license games, them he also raised them pretty promisingly until the kid was just about old enough to read, then started sprinkling crack cocaine on all of its meals, and now he's homeless, jerking off people in street corners for $60 bucks a pop.

 

The first one or two games weren't half bad, I almost feel nostalgia for the first action adventure platformer. Dunno what to say about to rest, except "Harry Potter cover-shooter, really?"

[ManifestedISO]

Anyhoo, everyone's favourite gaming executive, Don 'Deal With It' Mattrick is leaving M$ and going to Zynga. Don used to work at EA. If I worked at Zynga and was told that the new CEO was ex-EA and M$ I'd feel like a Turkic nomad who'd just heard the news that Ghenghis Khan was hiding over the next hill.

 

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/07/01/don-mattrick-named-zynga-s-new-ceo/

 

Edit: I don't know if his masterful handling of the XBoxOne debacle had something to do with this. But it should have.

 

 

Evidently, "Deal With It" knows exactly how to deal with it. Just another reason I'm happy to jump ship to Sony this year. 

[mkreku]

I looked at the most pre-ordered items in Sweden's biggest games retailer recently. To my not-surprise the PS4 was at the top of the pre-order list. But what did surprise me was that Xbox One was second, ahead of such titles as GTA5 and Battlefield 4.

 

I guess it really only is us geeks who care about this debacle stuff.

[Nordicus]

So I guess it's time to shake off your dirty Swedish heritage and move to Finland, as Xbones are nowhere to be seen on top lists of our retailers from the handful of big chains I've seen

Edited July 3, 2013 by Nordicus

[Azdeus]

I looked at the most pre-ordered items in Sweden's biggest games retailer recently. To my not-surprise the PS4 was at the top of the pre-order list. But what did surprise me was that Xbox One was second, ahead of such titles as GTA5 and Battlefield 4.

 

I guess it really only is us geeks who care about this debacle stuff.

 

Yeah, my mates whom are about as interested in these details and their implications as I am in their new shoes, that is to say, not one bit. The only reaction I got from my sis's boyfriend about Xbone's online requirements was; *Shrug* "I'm not worried about it, I never buy used games, I never lend games and my internet never goes wrong".

 

He's going to quickly change such tunes once he moves out here where I live...

 

Also a somewhat funny, entirely ficticious story from Yahtzee; http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/10460-The-Tale-of-M-and-S

Edited July 3, 2013 by Azdeus

[Drowsy Emperor]

Actually I've given that some thought. After my initial enthusiasm for the PS4 I've come to some conclusions.

The only console that's guaranteed to have true exclusives this generation is Nintendo (and its not doing well so far, but that's another story).

 

A PS4 or XBO might be completely pointless buys for anyone with a gaming PC. I see three major reasons for this:

 

1) For all intents and purposes they're an average PC in a custom (parts not replaceable) box.  Thus they're not easy to fix and sure to be technologically stomped by the PC in just a year or two.

 

This is a problematic investment in particular when you consider the following:

2) A gaming rig is not as expensive as it used to be. I've calculated the difference down to an approximate 200$ only (not counting the monitor), which is a small price to pay for the unmatched versatility the PC offers. And any household is likely to need a PC anyway.

 

In other words, even though this generation of consoles is cheaper than the last (more or less), you're getting less for your money. Weaker hardware and no fancy new features to make up for the difference (like the now affordable blue ray player) - on a closed system - you're still not going to get to play any of the PC centric genres (that due to being impossible to replicate on a console, or too niche, will never be ported).

 

A further assumption can be made that makes this difference even bigger:

3) In this generation of consoles we got to play almost everything worthwhile on the PC. The new generation is made on a pc friendly architecture that is going to drive up the likelihood of any successful game getting a port by about 100%. In fact, most games will probably be multiplatform, even more than they are now.

 

 

 

Other minor (or not so minor) reasons:

 

4) comfort issues no longer apply - you can now play pc games on the couch, in front of the TV, just as easily

5) console games require much the same process to get running as PC games  installation, etc.

6) since they're using the same hardware that PC uses, made by the same mass-manufacturers, a console and a PC should have similar rates of failure - but the PC, unlike the console out of warranty, is replaceable

7) huge difference between price of games makes PC gaming more affordable in the long run

 

 

I've concluded that any of the new consoles are a bad investment vs a gaming PC. They offer less for more money and the advantages they used to have (reliability, simplicity, comfort) have evaporated.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[alanschu]

 

 

1) For all intents and purposes they're an average PC in a custom (parts not replaceable) box.  Thus they're not easy to fix and sure to be technologically stomped by the PC in just a year or two.

 

Consoles have typically always been technologically stomped by the PC in a year or two.  Console advantage here is consistent platform.  This particularly helps developers.  That they are the same technology as the PC will make development less cumbersome too.

 

 

 

 

2) A gaming rig is not as expensive as it used to be. I've calculated the difference down to an approximate 200$ only (not counting the monitor), which is a small price to pay for the unmatched versatility the PC offers. And any household is likely to need a PC anyway.

 

Eh, I just bought a new computer (yesterday) and it still cost me $1400 (Canadian).  i5-3550, Radeon HD 7950 3GB, 16 GB of DDR3-1600 memory, 128GB SSD, 2 TB HDD.  Now some of that stuff is beyond spec for the console (the SSD in particular).  Now if I was ridiculously diligent and shopping around, I might get a better price, but I went to the local Memory Express because they also build it for me cheaply and it's super convenient.  Which is how most people do their shopping.

 

 

 

 

3) In this generation of consoles we got to play almost everything worthwhile on the PC. The new generation is made on a pc friendly architecture that is going to drive up the likelihood of any successful game getting a port by about 100%. In fact, most games will probably be multiplatform, even more than they are now.

 

I agree that the PC architecture will make games more likely to come to the PC.  I like this, as I'm a PC gamer.  It's still not a costless endeavour, however, and you will still get games that are console exclusive.

 

 

 

 

4) comfort issues no longer apply - you can now play pc games on the couch, in front of the TV, just as easily

 

It'd still require me to hook my computer up to the TV.  I'm a gaming enthusiast, and have virtually no interest in doing this because moving my box is not something that interests me.  I don't know how unique I am in my perspective.

 

 

 

 

5) console games require much the same process to get running as PC games  installation, etc.

 

Hmmm, I don't know if this is necessarily the case.  There's still a multitude of hardware configurations, and by the sounds of it they still want console games to be able to run off the disc (not necessarily an advantage, IMO) however.

 

 

 

 

6) since they're using the same hardware that PC uses, made by the same mass-manufacturers, a console and a PC should have similar rates of failure - but the PC, unlike the console out of warranty, is replaceable

 

This could go either way.  Not all equipment is built equally, and if Sony/MS cut corners (or definitely do not) then rates of failure will not be consistent.  Spoken from someone that had a motherboard with poor capacitors that died horribly on me in 2010 (although I did get 4 years out of that computer).

 

 

 

 

7) huge difference between price of games makes PC gaming more affordable in the long run

 

Steam sales and whatnot could be an issue.  Though at release PC gaming for the big titles is pretty much the same $60 at this point in time.  PC gaming is more affordable in the long run if people are willing to be patient, but I think that that is an uncommon trait among a large chunk of the gaming population.

 

 

 

There's also perspective and simply habit.  People need to see the gaming PC as an equivalent alternative.  I'd be skeptical if they will en masse.  And I still think that they'll have improved reliability, simplicity, and comfort for the majority of people that will use them.  I certainly think that they'll still have the perception that those traits are true, however, even if they aren't.

[greylord]

I am actually deep in the PS4 crowd, but I think, I will do the same what I have done with PS3... Wait until they release the first slim model with lower power consumption. My backlog on PS3 is still so big and with all the games which will be released this year, it is still lot of fun to have with my current baby

 

FFX/X-2 HD Remix

KH1.5 HD Remix

GT6

Xillia 1

Xillia 2

 

I think I am set for one or two more years... I am just happy that with my higher age come bigger patience, so I do not need to spent ridiculous amount of money on my hobbies anymore... I still remember to buy me 2500EUR PC just to be able to play Neverwinter Nights 2 on release day...

 

*sighs*

 

It is good that with age comes bundled with the shorter memory span also wisdom and patience

 

Definitely getting the FFX/X-2 remake as well.

 

Also, if you are into the Tales series...

 

don't Forget

 

Tales of Symphonia Chronicles supposedly coming out early next year also.

[ManifestedISO]

1) For all intents and purposes they're an average PC in a custom (parts not replaceable) box.  Thus they're not easy to fix and sure to be technologically stomped by the PC in just a year or two.

 

Thankfully, it is not average. The GPU of the PS4 will have access to the 8GB of system memory--the super-fast GDDR5 RAM--at the same time as the PS4's CPU, unlike the same components in a PC. The RAM in your PC is slower DDR3, unavailable to your GPU, which itself has only 2GB of VRAM. The potential for future-proofing the console's performance is very exciting. And it will be upgradeable, at least the hard drive, possibly with a sizzlingly-quick solid-state drive.

 

From the article:

 

Normally, a GPU is used to execute graphics commands rendering what we see on our screen, while compute commands, that normally simulate the world around us, drive the artificial intelligence and prompt the software to react to our actions, are handled by the CPU. The GPU of the PS4 has been optimized to break that barrier, thanks to the shared memory pool and to a secondary bus that allows it to read and write directly from and to the system memory. The number of compute commands that the architecture can queue has also been dramatically increased (to 64) in order to run a relatively large number of small programs simultaneously or almost (fine-grain).

 

In layman terms, what this means is that the GPU can directly support the CPU in performing compute tasks when there are free resources that would normally remain unused in a traditional system with separate CPU and GPU memory. If you have a PC and you like to benchmark your video memory usage while you game, you probably noticed that there are plenty times in which way less than 100% of the available resources are being used, and this system makes sure that those resources are put to good use, while still handling the graphics commands at the same time (asynchronous).

 

I can't stress enough, the value for money the PS4 has suddenly come to offer. It is, simultaneously, the most powerful and least expensive gaming platform ever.

Dammit I burned my burritos writing this post.  

Edited July 4, 2013 by ManifestedISO

[alanschu]

Least expensive?

[Keyrock]

The thing about consoles, is that they ironically tend to offer the best value for the money, from a strictly hardware perspective, when they are first released, which is also when they are the most expensive.  At launch a console often sells at very little profit, no profit, or even a loss.  As production costs go down and parts become cheaper they start to turn a profit.  A couple of years down the line when the console drops a hundred bucks in price, the components it is made of have dropped 150 buck in price.  

 

The down side is that what is presented at launch is what you're stuck with for the console cycle.  Even if a hardware revision is made with somewhat better components, games are still made with the lowest common denominator in mind (i.e. the launch specs).  So while the PS4, or even the XBone, may offer great value at launch, they're locked into that setup for the next 5 or 6 years.  Meanwhile, a year and a half from now you could buy a somewhat better PC for the same price.  Four years from now you could buy a PC that blows either console out of the water for the same price.  And that's not counting that, even with PS4's and XBone's expanded multimedia capabilities, a PC is still a FAR more versatile piece of equipment.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Keyrock

[Bos_hybrid]

3) In this generation of consoles we got to play almost everything worthwhile on the PC. The new generation is made on a pc friendly architecture that is going to drive up the likelihood of any successful game getting a port by about 100%. In fact, most games will probably be multiplatform, even more than they are now.

 

You still won't see Sony titles on PC. So essentially the status quo will be the same.

[ManifestedISO]

Least expensive and most powerful when adjusted for inflation and processing power compared with other platforms (or consoles, rather, in that Ars article).

 

The PS4, on the other hand, shows what a difference $100 makes as far as historical comparisons. Sony's new system is the cheapest one the company has ever launched when measured in real dollar value, and it hovers right around the median inflation-adjusted price for consoles historically.

 

I'm starting to sound like a shill, perhaps, and using absolutes like "platform" and "ever" may be reaching, but the hardware specification list is turning my nerd crank and making my PC sit up and act like a jealous sibling ... and the PS4 baby hasn't even been delivered yet. I just think the potential for developers to really do something special is finally here, for the masses, at a price cheaper than a new mattress.  

[alanschu]

 

 

The down side is that what is presented at launch is what you're stuck with for the console cycle.  Even if a hardware revision is made with somewhat better components, games are still made with the lowest common denominator in mind (i.e. the launch specs).  So while the PS4, or even the XBone, may offer great value at launch, they're locked into that setup for the next 5 or 6 years.  Meanwhile, a year and a half from now you could buy a somewhat better PC for the same price.  Four years from now you could buy a PC that blows either console out of the water for the same price.  And that's not counting that, even with PS4's and XBone's expanded multimedia capabilities, a PC is still a FAR more versatile piece of equipment.

 

 

The value consoles tend to provide later in their cycle is that development has matured and there's a good library of games that are now available for it.  What you describe happens every console platform, and the consoles still get the big booms in terms of software sold, while the PC tends to keep on chugging along.  Yes, you and I can go "hey, the console won't be as powerful in a few years."  But I don't think most people care.  Whether or not the perception is accurate/fair, consoles tend to push a lot more in sales for this reason and I would contend that it's mostly only the more tech savvy that will even recognize that their PC is more versatile, let alone have the desire to actually set it up in the living room as the multimedia entertainment box.

[alanschu]

 

 

I'm starting to sound like a shill, perhaps, and using absolutes like "platform" and "ever" may be reaching, but the hardware specification list is turning my nerd crank and making my PC sit up and act like a jealous sibling ... and the PS4 baby hasn't even been delivered yet. I just think the potential for developers to really do something special is finally here, for the masses, at a price cheaper than a new mattress.

 

Do you happen to know if offloading the processes onto the GPU requires developer work or not?

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

3) In this generation of consoles we got to play almost everything worthwhile on the PC. The new generation is made on a pc friendly architecture that is going to drive up the likelihood of any successful game getting a port by about 100%. In fact, most games will probably be multiplatform, even more than they are now.

 

You still won't see Sony titles on PC. So essentially the status quo will be the same.

 

 

That may be the case, but the PS2 years where Sony was drowning in must play exclusives is long gone. The PS3 exclusives list isn't all that long...

[Keyrock]

 

The down side is that what is presented at launch is what you're stuck with for the console cycle.  Even if a hardware revision is made with somewhat better components, games are still made with the lowest common denominator in mind (i.e. the launch specs).  So while the PS4, or even the XBone, may offer great value at launch, they're locked into that setup for the next 5 or 6 years.  Meanwhile, a year and a half from now you could buy a somewhat better PC for the same price.  Four years from now you could buy a PC that blows either console out of the water for the same price.  And that's not counting that, even with PS4's and XBone's expanded multimedia capabilities, a PC is still a FAR more versatile piece of equipment.

 

 

The value consoles tend to provide later in their cycle is that development has matured and there's a good library of games that are now available for it.  What you describe happens every console platform, and the consoles still get the big booms in terms of software sold, while the PC tends to keep on chugging along.  Yes, you and I can go "hey, the console won't be as powerful in a few years."  But I don't think most people care.  Whether or not the perception is accurate/fair, consoles tend to push a lot more in sales for this reason and I would contend that it's mostly only the more tech savvy that will even recognize that their PC is more versatile, let alone have the desire to actually set it up in the living room as the multimedia entertainment box.

 

I'm not debating your point, I was strictly speaking from a hardware point of view, as my post indicated.

 

Also, while developers learn to push the console tech as far as it can go, others also learn to push the existing (superior) PC tech as far as it can go.

 

Anyway, point is that I have nothing against consoles, but I recogniose that they're a stagnant target spec wise, while PC is a target that's always moving.  The PC model is definitely mot always he superior model for game development, in fact, often it is not.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Keyrock

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

1) For all intents and purposes they're an average PC in a custom (parts not replaceable) box.  Thus they're not easy to fix and sure to be technologically stomped by the PC in just a year or two.

 

Consoles have typically always been technologically stomped by the PC in a year or two.  Console advantage here is consistent platform.  This particularly helps developers.  That they are the same technology as the PC will make development less cumbersome too.

 

 

 

 

2) A gaming rig is not as expensive as it used to be. I've calculated the difference down to an approximate 200$ only (not counting the monitor), which is a small price to pay for the unmatched versatility the PC offers. And any household is likely to need a PC anyway.

 

Eh, I just bought a new computer (yesterday) and it still cost me $1400 (Canadian).  i5-3550, Radeon HD 7950 3GB, 16 GB of DDR3-1600 memory, 128GB SSD, 2 TB HDD.  Now some of that stuff is beyond spec for the console (the SSD in particular).  Now if I was ridiculously diligent and shopping around, I might get a better price, but I went to the local Memory Express because they also build it for me cheaply and it's super convenient.  Which is how most people do their shopping.

 

 

 

 

3) In this generation of consoles we got to play almost everything worthwhile on the PC. The new generation is made on a pc friendly architecture that is going to drive up the likelihood of any successful game getting a port by about 100%. In fact, most games will probably be multiplatform, even more than they are now.

 

I agree that the PC architecture will make games more likely to come to the PC.  I like this, as I'm a PC gamer.  It's still not a costless endeavour, however, and you will still get games that are console exclusive.

 

 

 

 

4) comfort issues no longer apply - you can now play pc games on the couch, in front of the TV, just as easily

 

It'd still require me to hook my computer up to the TV.  I'm a gaming enthusiast, and have virtually no interest in doing this because moving my box is not something that interests me.  I don't know how unique I am in my perspective.

 

 

 

 

5) console games require much the same process to get running as PC games  installation, etc.

 

Hmmm, I don't know if this is necessarily the case.  There's still a multitude of hardware configurations, and by the sounds of it they still want console games to be able to run off the disc (not necessarily an advantage, IMO) however.

 

 

 

 

6) since they're using the same hardware that PC uses, made by the same mass-manufacturers, a console and a PC should have similar rates of failure - but the PC, unlike the console out of warranty, is replaceable

 

This could go either way.  Not all equipment is built equally, and if Sony/MS cut corners (or definitely do not) then rates of failure will not be consistent.  Spoken from someone that had a motherboard with poor capacitors that died horribly on me in 2010 (although I did get 4 years out of that computer).

 

 

 

 

7) huge difference between price of games makes PC gaming more affordable in the long run

 

Steam sales and whatnot could be an issue.  Though at release PC gaming for the big titles is pretty much the same $60 at this point in time.  PC gaming is more affordable in the long run if people are willing to be patient, but I think that that is an uncommon trait among a large chunk of the gaming population.

 

 

 

There's also perspective and simply habit.  People need to see the gaming PC as an equivalent alternative.  I'd be skeptical if they will en masse.  And I still think that they'll have improved reliability, simplicity, and comfort for the majority of people that will use them.  I certainly think that they'll still have the perception that those traits are true, however, even if they aren't.

 

 

Oh I'm not saying people will start jumping ship en masse - I'm just listing my own reasons, as someone who can afford to invest only in one these things - so value for money is an issue. I don't think much will change overall, if the new generation of consoles takes off as Sony and MS are expecting.  

 

I'm just saying that consoles and the PC are converging towards offering a similar gaming experience, to the detriment of the consoles as less flexible/closed platforms that are also weaker in the hardware department.

 

It sounds like components are very expensive in canada. The PC I'm slowly building for myself is about 10-20% weaker than that but the core components don't cost more than 600 US$ (CPU, GPU, RAM, ATI 7850).

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

1) For all intents and purposes they're an average PC in a custom (parts not replaceable) box.  Thus they're not easy to fix and sure to be technologically stomped by the PC in just a year or two.

 

Thankfully, it is not average. The GPU of the PS4 will have access to the 8GB of system memory--the super-fast GDDR5 RAM--at the same time as the PS4's CPU, unlike the same components in a PC. The RAM in your PC is slower DDR3, unavailable to your GPU, which itself has only 2GB of VRAM. The potential for future-proofing the console's performance is very exciting. And it will be upgradeable, at least the hard drive, possibly with a sizzlingly-quick solid-state drive.

 

 

 

 

I honestly don't think the custom ram will make much difference. Console games are made by the lowest common denominator, in other words the hardware limitations of the XBOne are the ones you want to look at. 

 

The supposedly super fast RAM and memory sharing could just as easily turn into the cell processor. An advantage on paper but rarely visible in practice, if XBOne stays the primary platform for development. Even in the hypothetical situation where the PS4 takes the lead, its still just RAM memory.

 

The value for money disappears when you start buying games. The new Tomb Raider game retailed for 30 euro on the PC and 60 on the consoles. It does not take even a dozen games to make up for the additional cost of the PC. This is day one difference, in two months the price for PC TR will likely be cut down in half.

 

Down the line it just gets cheaper and cheaper, with CDKey sites, Steam/GoG sales etc.

[Mamoulian War]

 

I am actually deep in the PS4 crowd, but I think, I will do the same what I have done with PS3... Wait until they release the first slim model with lower power consumption. My backlog on PS3 is still so big and with all the games which will be released this year, it is still lot of fun to have with my current baby

 

FFX/X-2 HD Remix

KH1.5 HD Remix

GT6

Xillia 1

Xillia 2

 

I think I am set for one or two more years... I am just happy that with my higher age come bigger patience, so I do not need to spent ridiculous amount of money on my hobbies anymore... I still remember to buy me 2500EUR PC just to be able to play Neverwinter Nights 2 on release day...

 

*sighs*

 

It is good that with age comes bundled with the shorter memory span also wisdom and patience

 

Definitely getting the FFX/X-2 remake as well.

 

Also, if you are into the Tales series...

 

don't Forget

 

Tales of Symphonia Chronicles supposedly coming out early next year also.

 

 

Thanks for recommendation

 

I played only Tales of Graces f for the first time last month, but I really enjoyed the game, so I will definately get the symphonia too!

 

To bad they will probably never bring PS3 port of Vesperia to europe too