Good online playability on games, more offline multiplayer on some games, and to sort out these stupid hacks on online gaming!
Level 3
PatC_PSN wrote:Yes, we really need to be talking to people who are playing different games to us, and phones simply aren't good enough in such a pivotal situation. When you need to exchange meaningless, inane drivel with likeminded people it must be done through a console. Accept no substitutes.
Likewise with music. Why use a PC/CD/MP3 etc. player to listen to music when you can complain about it not being integegrated with a console? And what were those interfering developers thinking, creating that game soundtrack in the first place?
everyone i know on Xbox loves the X-game chat so its obviously a good thing and why have a hands free kit going with the TV turned up so the people on the other end can hear your Tv aswell as theres. where as a normal gaming headset will play the game and voices through it thus being a clearly better option than a phone. and plus the party feature is good when you jsut want to talk to your mates and you can just mute the whole voice comms on the game.
as for the music it would just be a nice option when its already there but its hardly ever used on the ps3 is just useless. and we all know a game soundtrack can get boring pretty quick and its always limited
James91 wrote:
phep wrote:
I disagree with the first part, I do think there was a very noticable difference between PS2 games and PS3 games, visually and in terms of size, though that's probably largely to do with the extra space available on the new discs as opposed to what was used on PS2?
It's nothing to do with the increased capacity offered by Blu-ray, graphical prowess is solely down to hardware like the CPU and GPU and nothing to do with storage.
Except if you double the resolution of a texture you quadruple the (uncompressed) storage requirement.
PatC_PSN wrote:
When you need to exchange meaningless, inane drivel with likeminded people it must be done through a console. Accept no substitutes.
Unfortunately meaningless, inane drivel makes the world go round these days. See the success of Facebook and Twitter and the through-put of this General Discussion board for examples.
seany_boy2k8 wrote:
...the party feature is good when you jsut want to talk to your mates and you can just mute the whole voice comms on the game....
Teamspeak provides not only cross-game chat, but cross-platform.
Level 3
InfiniteStates wrote:
James91 wrote:
phep wrote:
I disagree with the first part, I do think there was a very noticable difference between PS2 games and PS3 games, visually and in terms of size, though that's probably largely to do with the extra space available on the new discs as opposed to what was used on PS2?
It's nothing to do with the increased capacity offered by Blu-ray, graphical prowess is solely down to hardware like the CPU and GPU and nothing to do with storage.
Except if you double the resolution of a texture you quadruple the (uncompressed) storage requirement.
PatC_PSN wrote:
When you need to exchange meaningless, inane drivel with likeminded people it must be done through a console. Accept no substitutes.
Unfortunately meaningless, inane drivel makes the world go round these days. See the success of Facebook and Twitter and the through-put of this General Discussion board for examples.
seany_boy2k8 wrote:
...the party feature is good when you jsut want to talk to your mates and you can just mute the whole voice comms on the game....
Teamspeak provides not only cross-game chat, but cross-platform.
TS is only on pc though?
True but it still doesn't detract from my original point.
InfiniteStates wrote:
James91 wrote:
phep wrote:
I disagree with the first part, I do think there was a very noticable difference between PS2 games and PS3 games, visually and in terms of size, though that's probably largely to do with the extra space available on the new discs as opposed to what was used on PS2?
It's nothing to do with the increased capacity offered by Blu-ray, graphical prowess is solely down to hardware like the CPU and GPU and nothing to do with storage.
Except if you double the resolution of a texture you quadruple the (uncompressed) storage requirement.
InfiniteStates wrote:Well, it does - if you want higher definition output, you need to store higher definition textures. So graphical prowess is not only down to CPU and GPU. Although memory is more a factor than disk size, but still - it's not as cut and dried as you stated.
Which the Xbox 360 did easily over multiple discs for games that exceeded DVD capacity.
James91 wrote:
InfiniteStates wrote:Well, it does - if you want higher definition output, you need to store higher definition textures. So graphical prowess is not only down to CPU and GPU. Although memory is more a factor than disk size, but still - it's not as cut and dried as you stated.
Which the Xbox 360 did easily over multiple discs for games that exceeded DVD capacity.
And that's an adequately scaleable solution is it? Throw in more CPU/GPU power and increase the disk count...? At what number of disks do you draw the line and admit you need higher capacity storage?
Website ©2013 Sony Computer Entertainment Europe
All content, game titles, trade names and/or trade dress, trademarks, artwork and associated imagery are trademarks and/or copyright material of their respective owners. All rights reserved. [more info]
