Do all of these work on PC's & laptops ONLY, or can you get them to work for consoles as well? (In my case, the PS3)

*Quality post.

Pfff...my PS3 has that...

For a PS3 tech demo it's rather solid. Considering the environment and robotic arms are quite low poly, and that the vast majority go the character, it looks pretty solid. Add the modern mocap (developed by Weta Digital, used most famously in Avatar) it's fairly compelling.

Unfortunately so long as most game developers are working on console hardware so many generations behind, we'll never actually see this. I mean the most graphically impressive game is 'still' Crysis and that was made in 07. I personally suspect the next innovative game technologically will probably come from a small dev house, with good backers and enough time and expertise to really push gaming technically again. And of course the primary platform will have to be the PC.

If you're going to out one company for being in business with Foxconn, why not out them all? Own a game console? Your Xbox, PS3, and Wii were all made here. Like to read? This is where your Kindle came from.

Foxconn isn't just producing ithings and iphones, they assemble 40% of the world's electronics. Here's a list of SOME of Foxconn's clients (from wikipedia):

Acer Inc. (Taiwan)
Amazon.com (United States)
Apple Inc. (United States)
ASRock (Taiwan)
Asus (Taiwan)
Barnes & Noble (United States)
Cisco (United States)
Dell (United States)
EVGA Corporation (United States)
Hewlett-Packard (United States)
Intel (United States)
IBM (United States)
Lenovo (China)
Logitech (Switzerland)
Microsoft (United States)
MSI (Taiwan)
Motorola (United States)
Netgear (United States)
Nintendo (Japan)
Nokia (Finland)
Panasonic (Japan)
Philips (Netherlands)
Sharp (Japan)
Sony Ericsson (Japan/Sweden)
Toshiba (Japan)
Vizio (United States)

>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^therealblankman:
As for consoles vs PCs, you're right of course. At least partially- I frankly got sick of spending $400 every year or so to upgrade my graphics card to be able to even play the latest and greatest, so I've given up and joined the PS3 darkside. But you know what, there's hope for that as well. Valve software is bridging that divide in the right way. I bought Portal 2 for PS3 but using a code I can also play it on my PC, and if I want to play Co-op with someone it doesn't matter whether they're on a PC or PS3 either! Maybe other publishers will do the same going forward, but I doubt it.

You know, I constantly hear that being used as an argument against PC gaming, but unless you're obsessive about getting 100+ FPS with every single setting maxed out, it's just not true. I bought the PC I'm using right now in 2007 -- a decent system, not even top of the line at the time, with a high-end video card. For the last five years or so I've been playing the latest and greatest with the settings mostly maxed out, and I've never had any major issues. I probably won't upgrade for another year or so. So I definitely call BS on the old "you have to upgrade every year!" argument.


I'll second that. As long as you build your PC with a slight thought to the future, you can go years between upgrades without losing out on gaming (especially these days with all of the ports from thousand year old consoles). Even then, if you feel that you must upgrade because you refuse to use anything other than maximum settings (in which case--why are you on a console?), a new $200-$250 video card every couple of years is generally more than sufficient to keep you near the top.

>> ^therealblankman:

As for consoles vs PCs, you're right of course. At least partially- I frankly got sick of spending $400 every year or so to upgrade my graphics card to be able to even play the latest and greatest, so I've given up and joined the PS3 darkside. But you know what, there's hope for that as well. Valve software is bridging that divide in the right way. I bought Portal 2 for PS3 but using a code I can also play it on my PC, and if I want to play Co-op with someone it doesn't matter whether they're on a PC or PS3 either! Maybe other publishers will do the same going forward, but I doubt it.


You know, I constantly hear that being used as an argument against PC gaming, but unless you're obsessive about getting 100+ FPS with every single setting maxed out, it's just not true. I bought the PC I'm using right now in 2007 -- a decent system, not even top of the line at the time, with a high-end video card. For the last five years or so I've been playing the latest and greatest with the settings mostly maxed out, and I've never had any major issues. I probably won't upgrade for another year or so. So I definitely call BS on the old "you have to upgrade every year!" argument.

>> ^Quboid:

>> ^therealblankman:
>> ^gwiz665:
I can't agree with him on the last one, but otherwise fine fine.

That's because, no offense intended, like everyone else who keeps buying these games you're a sycophantic idiot who happily swallows whatever tiresome, un-original, unimaginative, over-rated swollen appendage the major publishers choose to repetitively cram down your open throat year after year.
All the best.

I must say, I'm getting pretty tired of the hipster "you've probably never heard of the games I play" attitude that is prevalent in PC gaming. The "You like Modern Warfare 3? That's cute, personally I'm more into SpaceChem but whatever" attitude. This is probably unfair on you @therealblankman but this certainly applies to a lot of people.
You know why we have BF3 and MW3? Because BFBC2 and MW2 sold well. Why was that? Because people liked them. Not because major mainstream publishers told us to like them, but because we actually did like them, in general. I don't care for MW3 but I bought Skyrim because I like "dumbed down, overly simplified RPGs" like Oblivion.
I don't think less of people who prefer MW3 to X3. I think less of people who play them on consoles, but that's because console gamers are simply genetically inferior.


Like I said to gwiz when I pm'd him: I don't begrudge these games simply because they're successful. Hell, these game's biggest crimes are that they're simply repetitive, derivative, formulaic and most egregious of all... BORING. If Twilight were a video game, it would be MWx. To quote H.L. Mencken "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people".

Shit, if nobody made money off them then we wouldn't have games to play. My favorite games of the past year are both huge hits, but at least they're fun to play... Batman: Arkham City and Portal 2. Haven't gotten into Skyrim (yet), but that's only because I'm terrified that I'll have to quit my job and not have friends any more if I start playing it- I did play Oblivion so I know of what I speak.

As for consoles vs PCs, you're right of course. At least partially- I frankly got sick of spending $400 every year or so to upgrade my graphics card to be able to even play the latest and greatest, so I've given up and joined the PS3 darkside. But you know what, there's hope for that as well. Valve software is bridging that divide in the right way. I bought Portal 2 for PS3 but using a code I can also play it on my PC, and if I want to play Co-op with someone it doesn't matter whether they're on a PC or PS3 either! Maybe other publishers will do the same going forward, but I doubt it.

>> ^Jinx:

I'm just really bored at the stagnate FPS genre atm. Hasn't been a good recent multiplayer FPS game recently apart from TF2, and that was a while back. Even then the focus is clearly on public play and the competitive community is small and dying out pretty quickly. Its sad that in this e-sports renaissance created by SC2 there is no FPS game to really step up and enter the limelight. The Arena style of Quake needs to make a comeback. Its so watchable as a spectator sport, and the skill the best players display is just astounding. Even watching these speedruns etc makes my jaw drop.
Instead we get boring Modern Yawnfair 12 - For Xbox360 and PS3! And yah, I'm a PC elitist. I watched some Halo3/Reach @ MLG and while it wasn't terrible, it was lightyears behind Quake. CS:GO is on the horizon, and I hope steam support that as much as they are pouring money into DotA2, but still, I prefer an FPS where you don't die in one pixelshot or from wallbanging spam.
/rant
Oh, and a new tribes is coming, but I was super turned off by their free2play model. If its anything like LoL I am not interested. I'd rather pay upfront and know I am on a equal footing than everybody else rather than sink limitless cash into making sure I can remain competitive.


I realize I'm necroing a 2 week old video thread, but, there are some things that nobody bothered to say.

Jinx: Many of these F2P games are not Pay2Win. You simply pay for variety/speed of unlocks. Nothing you can pay for with cash can make you do more damage, move faster, etc. The only things in LoL that absolutely require actual cash are character skins and extra rune pages. Everything else can be unlocked with the same points even the richest person has to earn by playing matches. Can you spend $1-200 and unlock every character? Yes. Do you have to...is it worth it? No. Just play with the free rotated characters each week. Personally, I'm sick of paying up front for shitty games or games I don't play that often.


@EvilDeathBee The difference is, many of the companies that used to produce the best stuff now produce mass market crap and many of the great companies were bought out and/or ruined by EA/Activision. Westwood Studios...gone. Lucasarts is plagued by the same mass market bullshit problems as the newer movie trilogy. id hasn't made a good shooter since before Doom 3, and Rage is the latest crap they've spewed out. You can find videos of Carmack saying they're being held back by console graphics/memory considerations. Luckily we have Blizzard and Valve still, though Blizzard is now Activision Blizzard, and is making console Diablo 3 and has added friggin Facebook to Battle net. GG. Valve seems to want to make hats, ignore HL2:Ep3 while splitting the already-split MOBA community by releasing DOTA2, which nobody really asked for given that HoN and LoL are rather popular. But, at least Valve and Blizz put out quality PC games. BF3 now has the useless Origin, which is nothing but a business move and provides zero benefit to gamers.

Games used to be art. Now they're all about money.

@Hawkinson "A few thousand"? Doom 2 sold like 2 million back before PC gaming was at all popular. Quake 2 sold 1-1.5 million also. I couldn't find Q1 numbers but I'd guess they're similar. You're also forgetting that Doom 2 was distributed as shareware, and I've seen estimates that 15 million played it. Give google a try next time you want to pull statistics out of your ass

I'm just really bored at the stagnate FPS genre atm. Hasn't been a good recent multiplayer FPS game recently apart from TF2, and that was a while back. Even then the focus is clearly on public play and the competitive community is small and dying out pretty quickly. Its sad that in this e-sports renaissance created by SC2 there is no FPS game to really step up and enter the limelight. The Arena style of Quake needs to make a comeback. Its so watchable as a spectator sport, and the skill the best players display is just astounding. Even watching these speedruns etc makes my jaw drop.

Instead we get boring Modern Yawnfair 12 - For Xbox360 and PS3! And yah, I'm a PC elitist. I watched some Halo3/Reach @ MLG and while it wasn't terrible, it was lightyears behind Quake. CS:GO is on the horizon, and I hope steam support that as much as they are pouring money into DotA2, but still, I prefer an FPS where you don't die in one pixelshot or from wallbanging spam.

/rant

Oh, and a new tribes is coming, but I was super turned off by their free2play model. If its anything like LoL I am not interested. I'd rather pay upfront and know I am on a equal footing than everybody else rather than sink limitless cash into making sure I can remain competitive.

>> ^HugeJerk:

What's the Parappa reference? Is it the thing that moves out of view from behind the dogs just as the soldiers enter?
>> ^Shepppard:
So, this video makes reference to:
CoD (or, generic WWII shooters), Twisted Metal, Parappa the Rappa, Little Big Planet, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy, Killzone, Uncharted, God of War, Portal, Infamous, Tekken, MLB/NFL generic games, Metal Gear, Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space, Bioshock, Hitman, Resistance and Assassins Creed.
Not sure if the bartender is supposed to be from somewhere, though.



Nope, that's the Mk.II or III, whichever is in MGS4, the parappa is on the wall behind the chick in the booth, it's just a crappy little drawing, but it's a dog in a red hat with a purple shirt.

Pause at 31 seconds, just before it switches back to the two soldiers, he's on the right side.

What's the Parappa reference? Is it the thing that moves out of view from behind the dogs just as the soldiers enter?

>> ^Shepppard:

So, this video makes reference to:
CoD (or, generic WWII shooters), Twisted Metal, Parappa the Rappa, Little Big Planet, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy, Killzone, Uncharted, God of War, Portal, Infamous, Tekken, MLB/NFL generic games, Metal Gear, Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space, Bioshock, Hitman, Resistance and Assassins Creed.
Not sure if the bartender is supposed to be from somewhere, though.

>> ^transporter:
why was that guy at Omaha beach if he was airborne?....Michael's a lier.


ZOMG! A plot hole!

>> ^viewer_999:

Just don't try to file a class action.

Hahahaha! Actual LOL.

Your video, "Michael" - Awesome Sony PS3 advert!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Why thank you very much

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
If at first you don't succeed... *promote