loftus42's forum posts

Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
[QUOTE="DumbDubya"]

It's $99 because PS2 is $99. Sega should re-launch it with some Wii ports. They could make back some of the money they lost all those years ago and redeem the failure of the system in the market.

People who buy Wiis and PS2s, would be interested.

Yes, I would buy it in an instant. Do some ports from the wii, and some from the PS2 would make this a no brainer for me.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
I don't have Xbox 360, so I'm not going to pass judgement on that. But Home is a) still in beta stage, so there is a lot of room for improvement (expect some soon) and b) bowling online for free is fun! :Dyazter
Yes it still is in beta stage. But, why do you need a 3-d environment to talk to your friends? It's just a different way to do party chat, with other people able to come in and join the conversation whether you want them to or not. Joe Blow from kansas can see what your saying to a friend without even having to join in on the conversation. talking about being a fly on the wall. At least Live is private, you can say what you want to your friends without anyone getting in on what you are saying. If I want them to hear what I am saying then I invite them into the chat. All Home is, is a glorified sims app. with out all the extra features that the Sims has. Hopefully this will get better, and have a way to do private party chat. Untill then Home is just boring and worthless IMO.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
[QUOTE="SeanDiff"]

Err... Live is a completely different thing to home... home = a 3d place where you can talk, live is the online service for the Xbox.

If you're thinking of PSN, I think PSN > XBL because it has dedicated servers on all first party games and is free.

Yea, but, but it's free. LOL, it should be. It does nothing that could warrent a cost. It does on-line gaming well, that's it. Dedicated servers for all first party games, LOL. that also depends on how popular they are. The game loses it's popularity, there goes the dedicated servers. Besides dedicated servers don't gaurantee lag free gaming. nothing does. P2P gaming, does gaming just fine IMO. I don't have lag on most games I play on a consistant basis, including Halo3, and Gears 2. The added Party chat, in-game invites, cross game party chat, celebrity gaming, netflix, etc. all are worth the extra cost for live, especially since EVERY game has the same features and operate the same way every time. The PS3 fanboys can spin this any way they want, But, PSn just will not be on the same level as Live until they get thier features in all games the same way. Period. Consistancy and Integration is what seperates PSn from Live. And makes Live so much better then PSn. I don't care if you never use these features, I don't use a lot of them also, but being able to use any one of these features in ANY game out the same way makes live so much better then PSn it's not even debateable. And before any one says it, yes I do have a PS3, and I play both on-line. Just play the 360 way more on-line because of the ease and integration of Live.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts

Home is a free "Second Life" type application that allows people to... ummmm, hang out (?) and Dress their own little avatars in hip pretend clothing. It supports the ability to lauch online games from within it for a few select titles, but it is no way the Online system of the PS3. That's the PSN.

Now if you wanna know which is better between PSN and LIVE... Short answer? How much a year would you pay for cross game chat? If that's worth the price of LIVE to you then there is your answer. If not, then I'd say they are equal, but the PSN is free.

santoron

if cross game chat is all you think Live is then obviously you have never had Live. But, but PSn is free. It should be, LOL. Live is so much more then PSn. Gold gives you gaming with celebs if your into that. Party chat, cross game invites, cross game chat, cross game party chat. Netflix, if you have a subscription for it. Early demos. thats all I can think of right now, but there is more. Live is well worth the cost if that's what your trying to say. Now, like I said you can't compare Live to home unless you just want to talk about the community aspects of the two systems. Even then with party chat, and video chat, Live is much better then Home.

Oh, and weekly, or daily gaming nights dedicated to certain games and certain groups of gamers. Like ladies night where you can sometimes play against some of the best female gamers in the world if your a girl. Cool stuff there for everyone.

Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts

home because it let u play online for free. the sole reason of online in consoles is to PLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY ONLINE and ps3 gives it to u for free.

halo_wars86
Home does not let yopu play on-line for free, PSn does, home does not. honestly it's not really fair to compare home to Live if you want to compare on-line gaming. For Social experiences, though, Live is much better then home. Home is boring. Live is not. Home is a glorified Sims option. Live is more integrated with everything.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]4D can never Exist. Our Brains couldnt even begin to process it. codymchargue
Maybe your brain cannot process it, but it does exist, we all live in it. In 2d mario, if a block was in your way, and was too tall, you were stuck there, in 3d you could just go around it. In 3d mario, if there were a wall that you could not go around or over, then you were stuck. In real life, you could utilize the fourth dimension... wait for it to get tore down, or tear it down. It is true, it's not something that is said to raise hype, and it is not in fable. It's about the polygons being able to react to time and change. In fable it was simple "If/then" type statements in the code, if time = something, then show the character as this, the different ages were specifically programmed in to look a different way. With 4d, the aging of materials and the way things react to change are not programmed for each individual item, the polygons are programmed to know how to change and how to react to life. If you draw a cartoon flip book of a car and flip it, it will never grow rust unless you draw it with rust, simply put, that is what the 360 does, it has to draw the changes it makes, but if you watch it long enough in real life, you will see the rust start to take place as a result of time, that is what the ps3 can do. It would take the 360 days to render the software that the ps3 can stream. This is not a fanboy talking about how the PS3 owns, it is tech specs and such, just facts.

Wrong. Graphics are drawn frame by frame, with the help of course by the GPU. Both the PS3 and the 360, and the PC etc. all deal with 0's and 1's. Nothing special. If you believe the PS3 can render graphics that would take the 360 days to render, your dreaming. Tech specs of the PS3 have been shown to be over reaching. Bottlenecks kill half these specs, and specs built on str8 through put is the other half. Real world gaming is different from spec sheets. and nothing except maybe.. maybe KZ2 show that the 360 can do anything the PS3 can do. Even that, given the right programmer, I doubt the game can't be done on the 360 also.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]If someone made 4d graphics we wouldn't be able to see it. At least not past the 3rd d. You see we live in 3d and see everything with length, heigth and width. We don't use enough of our brains to even comprhend much less notice anything in 4d. Newton maby us no.lightningbugx

If you can multitask, you can comprehend 5 dimensions. You have a 4 dimension perception of each item you are working on. And as long as you can recall history and predict future, you are perceiving in at least 4 dimensions.

You can consider the 4th dimension in graphics as the frame rate of a 3-d object moving. In such, every console is capable of 4D graphics.

Your splitting hairs. We can see only in 3 dimensions. we can percieve other demensions, but can not see them. we can percieve time as in knowing what something looked like a year ago, but rust or something else has happened. but we can not sit there and actually see grass grow. we just know from past memories that the grass has grown.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
[QUOTE="Danm_999"]

It was a claim supposed to resonate the jump from 2D to 3D. It doesn't actually mean anything, Sony just used it as PR crap.

To the people saying time, there is no agreement in the scientific community as to what the 4th dimension means, nor would having variable time in a game be new.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but to most physisists, time is the forth dimension. Depth, heigth, width, then time. It is a commonly held view, and is refered to as such in most college physics books. You can easily compare things by height, width, depth, and their relationship through time. It's obvious you have never read a college physics book or had a college physics course. But, no time in a video game is not new. Fable is (I think) one of the first games to use actual time as a demension in the game.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts

PC isn't a console. But PS3/PC would cover the most stuff.

PSdual_wielder
I agree, the PC isn't, IMO, a console. If I could keep my PC, then of course the PS360, but I would reluctenly give up my PS3 for my PC. But not my 360 or Live.
Avatar image for loftus42
loftus42

1086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 loftus42
Member since 2008 • 1086 Posts
Well the good definitely outweighs the bad in terms of XBL for MS, they make TONS of cash on it, except people like me won't buy it until the Live fees are eradicated. And I'm sure the money in (XBL) >>>>>>>> money potentially in-from people buying consoles+games when live fee eradicated. navstar29
I am glad they charge for it. Most of the people will take care how they act on-line because of the possibility of being kicked off or suspended. It doesn't work perfectly, but it stops cheating, and modding for the most part. People sometimes get away with it, but there is a lot less of it going on. Except for the young dweebs who's parents buy it for them. Those you just have to avoid, But I still find it to be less of a problem then free on-line PC communities.