When it comes to Sony, people aways blind themself to trash talk. PSP has basically the same hardware as the PS2, where they the SAME console? No. The PS3 has Touch Screen? I don't think so, so why on earth are you saying that the NGP is a mobile PS3? Because it is as powerful as a PS3? So, now the concept of being a handheld "diferent" of the console is being weaker, using exceeded hardware?
NikeX wrote:Is this the revolution? Playing PS3 games now mobile?
By the way, even if the NGP playing PS3 games, being able to play your PS3 save of some game on the go with the NGP IT'S A REVOLUTION, deal with it.
Very interesting Tatsumaru. But let's make not a big drift.
Making things mobile and more innovative to control (Wii, NGP) is not a revolution, it's rather the next step in our modern times.
It doesn't change the situation: Script events, better cosmetics / graphics.
A simple shooter - now mobile, with pointing device, and / or motion detecting in three dimensions, is a simple shooter. On Wii, on PS3, on 360. Makes fun. Yes.
But makes no revolution.
Minecraft (which curiously enough I don't like much) for example is the first step into a revolution.
I think the wrong way was made from decades ago. Users and Developers thought making better graphics (cosmetics) is advanced and make more fun. Ask yourself? Is that so? It's more attractive, but where is the fun? The exploring? A new world? Be creative?
Good games are like sex: Happens in the brain.
Not so on the screen.
What do you do with a woman you can only look at, but not touch?
Is this fun?
Where is the satisfaction? (Ban request, derail, included, I know)
Here is the point.
An alternative video game history would have a lower number of video game console / pc generations not focused on cosmetics (graphics) but on gameplay, interactivity, physics, A.I. etc...
A dollar spent in cosmetics is a dollar less spent in gameplay / design.
I think you're getting the picture now.
I'm not a fanboy. Are you a graphics fanboy?