Archangel3371 said:

My method is even easier GG, I don't buy games that are expendable. All mine are gems that are worth keeping.

As the King of Hobo's you've lowered your standards to the point where all games are gems worth keeping.

Dvader said:

gamingeek said:

After the SNES I decided to keep all my games, then you realise you have too much and sell the ones that aren't worth keeping. That's how to do it. Keep the ones you want to come back to someday, the rest is expendable.

But you get what $2 per game, that is not worth selling. Every once and a while you may have an old gem that gets you money, maybe then you sell (I want to sell Ico, can get me a ton of cash and I don't give three craps about that game).

Are you trading in at stores? Jesus that's low. Use ebay and set your own price.

Dvader said:

Hmm Kotaku liked it:

I just played SOCOM 4 with the newly-named PlayStation Move controller. And now I know how the PlayStation 3's motion-sensitive controller is not just a me-too Wii controller.

For those who need the basics, the PlayStation Move is a remote-like motion-sensitive controller with a sphere at the end. The sub-controller is an off-hand controller being offered for some Move games. The Move controller connects to the PS3 with the help of a PlayStation Eye camera, which detects the Move's colored sphere, while tilt sensors in the move transmit their position data to the PS3.

But at first glance, the whole thing seems like just another version of the Wii Remote and Nunchuk.

Not quite. There are key differences:

-Fewer buttons: The Move controller is actually even more streamlined than the Wii Remote. Nintendo's Remote still offers/confuses a new player with a d-pad, plus, A, minus, 1 and 2 buttons as well as a home button and B trigger. The Move has its own home button and underbelly trigger, but just five other points of button input. That makes the controller actually feel a little naked and therefore likely even less daunting to a new player — unless they need their controllers to look like TV remotes.

-No wasted batteries: The Wii remote sucks up AA battery juice. The Move and its companion sub-controller are rechargeable via the same mini-USB connection used to charge the PS3's main controller.

-A smarter controller: I played SOCOM 4, a third person-shooter, with the Move pointed at the TV like a gun and the sub-controller in my left hand to command character movement. Wii games that were controlled with Remote and Nunchuk could be befuddled if the player pointed the Remote away from the screen. If you were playing a shooter and aimed just off the screen, the game's camera might start spinning or the game would pause and ask for the player to point at the TV again. The combination of camera sensors — the Sony Eyetoy on top of the TV detects the presence of the Move — and a gyroscope prevented SOCOM 4 from getting confused. When I moved my controller to point off of the TV, the gyroscopic sensors kept track of my movement. The same thing happened when a SOCOM developer blocked the Eyetoy camera. The precision of the controller diminishes in these situation. but the PS3 doesn't lose track of the device.

-No off-hand gyro: The Wii Nunchuk has a sensor that detects motion, more crudely than does the Remote. The PS3's version of the Nunchuk, does not have a motion sensor, according to a developer I was speaking to. There's a chance that is not final, but that is the case with the controllers at Sony's showcase event today. But that's why two-handed boxing-style games were shown with two Moves. On the Wii, those kinds of games are handled, with supposedly less precision, with a Remote and Nunchuk.



-The Z: Without a Wii MotionPlus, the Wii Remote cannot accurately sense depth. The Wii's sensor bar doesn't know how close the player is standing to their TV, not can it recognize movements toward or away from it. The PS3, however, can detect such movement in the Z-plane. It does this thanks to the sphere at the end of the controller. If the player moves the Move toward themselves, the PlayStation Eye camera sees the sphere shrink and therefore knows the controller has been moved in the Z-plane. Clever.

That is a bad piece of writing. A launch game, Elebits showed that the Wii remote and sensor  bar can indeed sense depth into and out of the screen. The boxing game comparison is bad because you need two of them, you could just as easily use two wii remotes for that. The wii chuk is better as it actually has motion in it. The aiming description was terrible, firstly because if you are pointing away from the screen in a Wii FPS then you are DOING IT WRONG. Secondly, other games have compensated for this already and even Red Steel 2 uses Motionplus to stop the cursor from wigging out off screen.

And fewer buttons on the remote? WTF? No, there aren't.

At least now we'll have some actual modern technology to go along with the controller. Actually its not even modern anymore, its 5 years old! LOL....but a lot better than 10 year old Gamecube tech that usually doesn't even get pushed as hard as the Cube did since Nintendo had to say "graphics and sound mean teh nothings".

And it will hopefully force Nintendo to not sit on the dated Wii like a fucking Game Boy.

edgecrusher said:

GG sounds bitter.

Don't be an ass.

I'm not saying anything anyone else isn't. Even you've said how Valve could have made a great Wii FPS by now.

And its a factual error that Kotaku made about the sensor bar not sensing depth.

Plus this picture says it all. How is it not a rip?

robio said:

End of the day I still say Move and Movechuck and the Upchuck and everything else they've shown us is doomed. It was never the motion controls that made the Wii successful.  It was the lower price, and very slick marketing.  The only thing this is really going to do is drive the PS3 back up to the $400 price point.

Assuming this launched around September, I don't see more than 1.5 million units being sold for the rest of the year unless they have a killer game for it.  And another Wii Sports isn't going to be that game. Sony is acually going to have to come up with something original to make this sell.

The price might be prohibitive. Every wii comes with a remote and chuk.

Even motionplus has a relatively small userbase compared to install base and barely a handful of games. At $100 for the controller, camera and game you're going into music game controller prices. I think you will get a lot of support in the option menus of a lot of games, maybe even patches, but whether it will be widely used or not? That's the question.  

Not until they package it in with every new system I think.

Dvader said:

Engadget:

We hate to say this about "pre-alpha" software, but we're feeling lag. An on-rails shooter we tried out, dubbed The Shoot, was discernibly inferior to shooting experiences we've had on the Wii, both in precision and refresh rate of the aiming cursor.

I don't get this, if the cursor is laggy and not as accurate then this shouldn't work properly:

Dvader said:

As far as we can tell, the control scheme for Socom 4 is quite similar to dual-controller shooter setups on the Wii, with the camera moving based on your aiming cursor hitting the edge. It's hard to see this as the preferred hardcore setup, but we're told it's configurable, so we'll try and see what else is on offer.

?

Agnates said:

would mean you move the view and the crosshair independently of each other, then it was gonna be so awesome cos for shooters you could play with the crosshair dead center as on PC, now SOCOM is shown using the same basic mechanics as Wii shooters.

That makes no sense. Those control setups just dont work. In some IR games yeah you can have the stick moving the camera, but for FPS or third person games where you move and shoot at the same time, the bounding box is the only way to do it.