The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Things are not rosey in Camp X-Box, if these comments are anything to go by anyway.....
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mr. PlayStation and Sony Computer Entertainment CEO Ken Kutaragi was first to put the boot in.
'Microsoft was finished before it even got started. They have no games,' he ranted. 'Microsoft has put itself out of the game. Retailers in the US are already disappointed.' Fighting talk, then, but wait, there's more. 'Microsoft does not understand the entertainment business. The processing speed of their console is not fast enough and the graphics were rough. The next game platform belongs to Sony and Nintendo.'
Of course, you might expect a rival to s**g the launch, though it's unusual for the suits to be so, well, vicious. What you don't expect is for two of the biggest third-party developers in the world, both currently developing Xbox games, to put the boot in. According to the FT, Electronic Arts and Infogrames have both confirmed that they've yet to receive final development software. EA chairman and CEO Larry Probst has obviously been drinking the same truth serum as Kuturagi. 'Microsoft has a lot to do over the next few months. They are on a death march right now." Death march? Good lord, what can he mean?
In Microsoft's defence it's no secret that EA have a close relationship with Sony and Robbie Bach, Microsoft's chief Xbox officer, is insistent some final development kits last week and that the project remained on schedule.
Fight! Fight! Fight!...
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mr. PlayStation and Sony Computer Entertainment CEO Ken Kutaragi was first to put the boot in.
'Microsoft was finished before it even got started. They have no games,' he ranted. 'Microsoft has put itself out of the game. Retailers in the US are already disappointed.' Fighting talk, then, but wait, there's more. 'Microsoft does not understand the entertainment business. The processing speed of their console is not fast enough and the graphics were rough. The next game platform belongs to Sony and Nintendo.'
Of course, you might expect a rival to s**g the launch, though it's unusual for the suits to be so, well, vicious. What you don't expect is for two of the biggest third-party developers in the world, both currently developing Xbox games, to put the boot in. According to the FT, Electronic Arts and Infogrames have both confirmed that they've yet to receive final development software. EA chairman and CEO Larry Probst has obviously been drinking the same truth serum as Kuturagi. 'Microsoft has a lot to do over the next few months. They are on a death march right now." Death march? Good lord, what can he mean?
In Microsoft's defence it's no secret that EA have a close relationship with Sony and Robbie Bach, Microsoft's chief Xbox officer, is insistent some final development kits last week and that the project remained on schedule.
Fight! Fight! Fight!...
Page:
1995 : Along come Ken and the boys, with their grey box that takes over the gaming world.
1996 : Along comes Nintendo with twice the power but oh look, some glossy arcadey games with little sustenance for any real gamers. Yes, Goldeneye, bla bla bla bla, but no one would play it unless they were pi£$ed (no doubt illegally) at two in the morning. Round a mate's house.
1999 : Along comes Solid Snake. Nuff said.
2000 : PS2 arrives, heralding as it does the new era of gaming. Dropship, MGS2, Getaway, GT3, Stuntman, Tony3, Silent Hill2, ISSpro2, SSX, Red Faction okay I'll stop now, but there's still plenty more.
2001 : Bill goes home and cries. In safe mode.
2001 : Bill brings out a machine much more powerful (I'm scared) than PS2. Oh that'll be really good then. Its got so much graphics 3D bladadah it must have lots of good gam-oh no hang on a minute, a racing game (with amazing graphics remember), oh and that's about it. Plus his machine is the size of a small farm, and just as covered in its own sh@*.
1996 : Along comes Nintendo with twice the power but oh look, some glossy arcadey games with little sustenance for any real gamers. Yes, Goldeneye, bla bla bla bla, but no one would play it unless they were pi£$ed (no doubt illegally) at two in the morning. Round a mate's house.
1999 : Along comes Solid Snake. Nuff said.
2000 : PS2 arrives, heralding as it does the new era of gaming. Dropship, MGS2, Getaway, GT3, Stuntman, Tony3, Silent Hill2, ISSpro2, SSX, Red Faction okay I'll stop now, but there's still plenty more.
2001 : Bill goes home and cries. In safe mode.
2001 : Bill brings out a machine much more powerful (I'm scared) than PS2. Oh that'll be really good then. Its got so much graphics 3D bladadah it must have lots of good gam-oh no hang on a minute, a racing game (with amazing graphics remember), oh and that's about it. Plus his machine is the size of a small farm, and just as covered in its own sh@*.
Bewarethetoadsoffate wrote:
> Did they? Thats disgusting! How can that be legal? Its
> wrong, just totaly wrong!
They did...
http://serverpool.reserve.co.uk/news/story.php?id=812
Basically, no version apart from the X-Box version can use actual character voices or moves from the film, or include any online play.
As I said in a post on the FoG forum, I don't mind the odd exclusive game for any platform (GT3 for PS2, Oddworld for X-Box etc.), but paying a company to deliberately cripple or otherwise hold back on rival platform versions is absolutely wrong.
Mind you, to me it shows that Microsoft are more than a little concerned that their machine won't do as well as they expect.
It implies that they're not confident that the X-Box game will out-shine rival platforms based purely on the capabilities of their console, and so they must pay to have the opposition versions deliberately weakened before release.
It's kind of like Lennox Lewis paying someone to break Mike Tyson's hand a week before a world title fight, because he doesn't feel he can win if all things are equal...
> Did they? Thats disgusting! How can that be legal? Its
> wrong, just totaly wrong!
They did...
http://serverpool.reserve.co.uk/news/story.php?id=812
Basically, no version apart from the X-Box version can use actual character voices or moves from the film, or include any online play.
As I said in a post on the FoG forum, I don't mind the odd exclusive game for any platform (GT3 for PS2, Oddworld for X-Box etc.), but paying a company to deliberately cripple or otherwise hold back on rival platform versions is absolutely wrong.
Mind you, to me it shows that Microsoft are more than a little concerned that their machine won't do as well as they expect.
It implies that they're not confident that the X-Box game will out-shine rival platforms based purely on the capabilities of their console, and so they must pay to have the opposition versions deliberately weakened before release.
It's kind of like Lennox Lewis paying someone to break Mike Tyson's hand a week before a world title fight, because he doesn't feel he can win if all things are equal...
It is illegal, but it hasn't been proven either. Anyway, they ended up covering it by paying for the game to be exclusive for 6 months!!
Wòókiee Møn§†€R wrote:
> Bonus wrote:
> Blueyonder have signed a major deal to supply a
> Broadband conection
> for the PS2. Telewest own Blueyonder and
> Microsoft are a major
> shareholder in Telewest!!
That is
> very interesting... I wonder if Microsoft will 'lend' them several
> million dollars in a bid to limit PS2's online features, similar to
> the way in which they bribed Interplay to restrict the PS2 version
> of The Matrix game...
Did they? Thats disgusting! How can that be legal? Its wrong, just totaly wrong!
> Bonus wrote:
> Blueyonder have signed a major deal to supply a
> Broadband conection
> for the PS2. Telewest own Blueyonder and
> Microsoft are a major
> shareholder in Telewest!!
That is
> very interesting... I wonder if Microsoft will 'lend' them several
> million dollars in a bid to limit PS2's online features, similar to
> the way in which they bribed Interplay to restrict the PS2 version
> of The Matrix game...
Did they? Thats disgusting! How can that be legal? Its wrong, just totaly wrong!
Nope, I think that the PS2 and Xbox will use the same system in the UK and that by letting Sony fund half of this project MS will save money, anyhow I posted the Telewest press release in this forum, ill pop it for you to have a read, they talk about the MS implications!!
Bonus wrote:
> Blueyonder have signed a major deal to supply a Broadband conection
> for the PS2. Telewest own Blueyonder and Microsoft are a major
> shareholder in Telewest!!
That is very interesting... I wonder if Microsoft will 'lend' them several million dollars in a bid to limit PS2's online features, similar to the way in which they bribed Interplay to restrict the PS2 version of The Matrix game...
> Blueyonder have signed a major deal to supply a Broadband conection
> for the PS2. Telewest own Blueyonder and Microsoft are a major
> shareholder in Telewest!!
That is very interesting... I wonder if Microsoft will 'lend' them several million dollars in a bid to limit PS2's online features, similar to the way in which they bribed Interplay to restrict the PS2 version of The Matrix game...
Blueyonder have signed a major deal to supply a Broadband conection for the PS2. Telewest own Blueyonder and Microsoft are a major shareholder in Telewest!!
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Flying Pig wrote:
Fight! Fight! Fight!...
I agree..........
Fight! Fight! Fight!...
I agree..........
I want to see what happens to these two consoles you know for the first time it looks almost like a simultaneous launch i don't think any of them (Microsoft and Nintendo) will want to lose to the competition because of lack of enough consoles and also now the consumer has a choice unlike the launch of PS2.
The only game I likr the look of is Halo.
Page: