Kaz Hirai (SCEA) Interview - 1up/EGM

[jvd]

I'm willing to give all three consoles a shot. Are you?

Most likely not .

This gen i bought a dc and a gamecube. The dc was dead by the time the gamecube came out and the gamecube had few games through out its life . However I don't feel like i missed out on anything ground breaking this gen. I had my pc and played many games .

With school and a real job I don't have alot of time .My friends don't have alot of time either this gen so we picked xbox 360 because of live. We can go home after a hard day of work and jump on live and play games and enjoy ourselves .

I might buy the ns5 depending on its cost and how they handle past nintendo games. is it a charge per play ? pay to own ? Lots of questions .


I'm passing on sony because a) I couldn't stand the playstation controller , b) thier online plans right now seem laughable c ) there haven't been many games this gen from sony that i feel i missed out on . To many of them are sequals that should have been put down many years ago imo . Not because they have been done to death but because of how often they have been done to death .


All in all i don't see myself having the time to play 3 consoles + my pc games this gen .

 

[blakjedi]

A game could support 1080p from day one, regardless if you have the TV to display it on. The day you get a TV that supports 1080p, you can play that game at 1080p.

I think fans of Xbox Live! should not argue the point against Sony, but you should try to convert the 90 PERCENT of Xbox fans who are not on Live. Would it not make more sense to convert you own, then to criticize the competition? I will never understand that.

CONTENT is KING!

I'm not sure what your are arguing here...

1080p

Contrary to what you seem to be saying 1080p does not equal content nor is it a Standard of any value to either the HD community or developers. Why:

1) Because its merely a resolution without existing content of any value and 2) because unless you hook it up to an expensive powerful projector/monitor you cant play anything at that resolution. Meanwhile 720p/1080i are real supported resolutions for everything HD (videogames and broadcasts). This argument is really silly.


Online
At least ten percent of xbox users use live. Thats pretty good,but the other 90% just dont want to or cant pay 50 bucks for the year. The service itself has no comparison in the online world for the value you get.
Whereas Sony has a one-off online strategy.

Dig this: I can play Halo/Rallisport and Rainbow six online(broadband) with friends. Uniform forum, fomat and tools used to manage the games. Sony's online games CAN be free but aren't necessarily.

With 360's free weekend live service, now MS can capture all the people that would like to use live (those 90% you harp on) in a better environment than any currently established by Sony. Kinda like free weekends and long distance on cellphones in the US but better because you dont have to pay for the overall service - just have an X360.

I think supporting 720p as a STANDARD for all games and including Live service out the box, basically free and with EVERY game is better value that impacts CONTENT than any argument you are making here.

 

[Titanio]

there haven't been many games this gen from sony that i feel i missed out on . To many of them are sequals that should have been put down many years ago imo . Not because they have been done to death but because of how often they have been done to death . .

Quite a grandiose statement for someone who hasn't owned a PS2 this gen Even more silly when you consider the high presence given to original PS3 titles at E3 - despite being further from release, Sony has announced as many original first party titles for PS3 as MS has for X360 (I count 5 to 6 for both).

Also, many people have greatly enjoyed those "sequels" you talk about! And do we want to start counting original titles on PS2 vs other platforms..? Sony has published an awful lot of new IP on PS2 - yes, some have got second and third sequels, but they were still original to PS2 (born on PS2, versus carry-overs from PS). A quick look at IGN's database shows Sony has published comfortably more original titles on PS2 than MS has on Xbox - I didn't do an exact count, but there is certainly more.

I could sort of understand if you were looking at things from the perspective of quality of original content on Xbox vs PS2, since that would be a purely subjective matter, but having not owned Xbox either, I'm not sure how you could reach any kind of conclusion regarding relative quality between the two systems.

 

[onanie]

I think supporting 720p as a STANDARD for all games and including Live service out the box, basically free and with EVERY game is better value that impacts CONTENT than any argument you are making here.

You're quite happy to insist that there won't be any 1080p content available, even in the future. When it does become commonplace, the short answer is that Xbox 360 won't be playing it.

MS does appear generous to allow people to play certain games for free on weekends.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why does supporting 720p make sense as a standard if 80% of users can't benefit from it, whereas 1080p as an option is a waste? If 720p is god for effects and beenfits 480p users as it can be scaled down, so too can 1080p. eg. rendering at 1080p is the same as rendering at 480p with lots of AA.

My GPU can render at 2000x1500. Dropping the resolution means better performance at lower res. PS3 can render at 1080p. Dropping the resolution means better performance.

Unless you're saying a game targetted at 1080p will be an inferior use of resources at 720p then a game targetted at 720p, which I probably agree with. Targetted at 1080p it may have simpler shaders for example. The same could be said of 720p though. A game targetted for that resolution with have to make the same concessions to 480p regards using resources that targeted 480p by design. eg. 720p shaders will have to be simpler than 480p shaders.

But I'd be extemely surprised if any devs target that resolution. I'm more inclined to believe they'll target lower with the option for higher output later on. Sony seem to be acting in typical Sony fashion - set no defaults or standards; provide hardware and leave it entirely up to the develops what they want to do with it. And output at 1080p hasn't taken away from elsewhere. It's not like adding support for 1080p rendering means less system RAM or no HDD. There's nothing stopping Xenos rendering 1080p, save that MS haven't included 1080p output in the 360.

I can't see any problem with giving people, users and developers, different options to use the same hardware in different ways. If a company want's to output only PAL frames (an EU company) they can throw out stupidly manic shaders. If a company wants to create high-res games at 1080p they can do. What's wrong with choice?

 

[onanie]

With gripes the Sony too much emphasis on 1080p, (Cost, both monetary value and graphical umph could be spent elsewhere)

Some would be happy that Sony is at least striving for the "graphical umph" in the area of resolution (and its dependencies, such as shader hardware). Where else could it be spent?

 

[jvd]

Quite a grandiose statement for someone who hasn't owned a PS2 this gen Even more silly when you consider the high presence given to original PS3 titles at E3 - despite being further from release, Sony has announced as many original first party titles for PS3 as MS has for X360 (I count 5 to 6 for both).

Errr I can walk into my basement and play ps2 anytime I want . My little sister has the system and about 15 games . I've played many original ps2 games . None impressed me . I was not impressed at all by god of war . The ffs have grown old for me after 6 , the only game i had fun playing was dragon warrior and i had to translate the text by hand .

Also, many people have greatly enjoyed those "sequels" you talk about

Thats great but those people aren't me and weren't asked if they were going to buy all 3 consoles . I answered the posters question about me . Not about these other people your talking about .

I could sort of understand if you were looking at things from the perspective of quality of original content on Xbox vs PS2, since that would be a purely subjective matter, but having not owned Xbox either, I'm not sure how you could reach any kind of conclusion regarding relative quality between the two systems.

Well I can walk into my other sisters room and play her xbox haha . Or go to my oldest sisters house and play xbox with my brother in law .

See I've sampled everything both consoles had to offer and I was very happy with my choice this gen . I stated my reasoning for what my upcoming console choices will be. They are my choices and none of them are wrong . You may claim that the ps2 had alot of original titles but original doesn't equal good and good original titles doesn't mean they will automaticly apeal to me . Because that is who I was talking about ... me .

 

[jvd]

With gripes the Sony too much emphasis on 1080p, (Cost, both monetary value and graphical umph could be spent elsewhere)

Some would be happy that Sony is at least striving for the "graphical umph" in the area of resolution (and its dependencies, such as shader hardware). Where else could it be spent?

More shaders / complexer (this a word ) shaders at 720p with hdr + fsaa . Since that is the res most people will be using . I like that combo personaly . I don't e vne know when I can buy a 1080p 60hz tv for a rreasonable price

 

[mckmas8808]

You may claim that the ps2 had alot of original titles but original doesn't equal good and good original titles doesn't mean they will automaticly apeal to me

Exactly you are talking about yourself. So don't come on a board as a mod and say that the PS2 has too many sequels that have been done to death. If that's Sony's negative then of course the other two consoles should have the same negatives.

I've played many original ps2 games . None impressed me . I was not impressed at all by god of war .

Now that speaks for itself. To me that quote exposes you for what you are. I might put that in my sig.

 

[Titanio]

You may claim that the ps2 had alot of original titles but original doesn't equal good and good original titles doesn't mean they will automaticly apeal to me . Because that is who I was talking about ... me .

That's all fine, but I see the "originality" card pulled far too many times against Sony, very misguidedly. Quality is a subjective point, but in terms of support for original games, Sony has given more with PS2 than MS has with Xbox..in that context, complaining about sequels seems silly.

More shaders / complexer (this a word ) shaders at 720p with hdr + fsaa . Since that is the res most people will be using .

Just to keep things in perspective, most people will be playing with SDTVs.

 

[onanie]

More shaders / complexer (this a word ) shaders at 720p with hdr + fsaa

No doubt, there are several possibilities.

 

[eDoshin]

You may claim that the ps2 had alot of original titles but original doesn't equal good and good original titles doesn't mean they will automaticly apeal to me . Because that is who I was talking about ... me .

That's all fine, but I see the "originality" card pulled far too many times against Sony, very misguidedly. Quality is a subjective point, but in terms of support for original games, Sony has given more with PS2 than MS has with Xbox..in that context, complaining about sequels seems silly.

IMO, the only game I've felt worth getting on xbox has been Ninja Gaiden .. and how original is that? Sly, Jak, Ratchet, DMC .. there are so many more new franchises that started this gen than I care to list. Anyone who pulls out the rehash card is just blindly biased. I would not mind seeing these franchises continued onto the next console with its upgraded graphics. I would only be disappointed if these devs did not also come up with brand new franchises.

 

[jvd]

Exactly you are talking about yourself. So don't come on a board as a mod and say that the PS2 has too many sequels that have been done to death. If that's Sony's negative then of course the other two consoles should have the same negatives.

Perhaps you should only speak when you under stand the context of the posts and who I was replying to and what shape my replys take .

The poster asked me if i would buy all 3 next gen systems and I posted and listed my reasons . Of which I clearly listed are my opinons . Do not seek to instigate me .

Now that speaks for itself. To me that quote exposes you for what you are. I might put that in my sig.

What a person that doesn't like the original games on the ps2 ? Jolly good job you've exposed me for something I've freely admited too in the past and again today in these very posts . Because they are my opinions .

That's all fine, but I see the "originality" card pulled far too many times against Sony, very misguidedly. Quality is a subjective point, but in terms of support for original games, Sony has given more with PS2 than MS has with Xbox..in that context, complaining about sequels seems silly.

Well I hardly see many original titles from sony . I see many original tittles on the ps2 and psone but not many that are made from sony . Although I will admit I am lacking of my knowledge of second party developers from sony . I don't really know which one has given more . I can only comment on what i've seen and played .

Just to keep things in perspective, most people will be playing with SDTVs.

That is correct , and i've said it before I believe in this very thread or anothre one today when talking about why many don't feel 1080p is important . The majority of users will be playing on sd sets , a small number will be playing on hdtv sets of which 720p will be the majority for some time to come (as i've said most likely till the end of the decade ) Since even though 1080p screens will come about and start to sink in price after a time , 720p with a million less pixels will drop in stride too .

IMO, the only game I've felt worth getting on xbox has been Ninja Gaiden .. and how original is that? Sly, Jak, Ratchet, DMC .. there are so many more new franchises that started this gen than I care to list. Anyone who pulls out the rehash card is just blindly biased. I would not mind seeing these franchises continued onto the next console with its upgraded graphics. I would only be disappointed if these devs did not also come up with brand new franchises.

Hmm correct me if i'm wrong but don't each of those titles already have 3 versions out ? 1 , 2 ,3 ? I think dmc released a 4th didn't it ?

DMC has 3 games out , a psp version and a ps3 title coming out , That is 3 games in 6 years . Sly has 3 games out in the same time frame . Ratchet and clank has 3 too . That fits right into my personal views that too many games in a limited time frame starts to ruin the experiance . Which i have said many times before .


People you may not like what i'm saying , but its my opinions . If you don't like them that is fine . But actually read the posts and don't take things out of context .

 

[Tap In]

.....
. You're getting a little worked up over Sony marketing stuff that MS obviously doesn't have if it was Sony launching and micrsoft doing the marketing would you honestly even be complaining?

I agree that it is marketing but... I think MS was more than able to output at 1080p in fact the Xenos can absolutely produce it, BUT rather than play a stupid numbers game, MS did what I see they have done during this entire process.

they chose the most common, balanced choice and made it standard for all games.

They are approaching this system and launch with poor marketing skills (based on your description of marketing) but with a well thought out balanced, REALISTICALLY attainable goal across the board.

OTOH, I think Sony has been grasping at straws by marketing on bigger numbers with no set standards or road map that we can see. (I mean how many people are really going to play with 7 controllers on one TV let alone own 7 controllers?), another example of the "bigger is better" approach.


Love them or hate them MS's approach has been much more palatable for me than Sony's so far.

 

[Titanio]

Well I hardly see many original titles from sony . I see many original tittles on the ps2 and psone but not many that are made from sony . Although I will admit I am lacking of my knowledge of second party developers from sony . I don't really know which one has given more . I can only comment on what i've seen and played .

I'm talking about their publishing portfolio, which has included a very healthy number of original titles.

DMC has 3 games out , a psp version and a ps3 title coming out , That is 3 games in 6 years . Sly has 3 games out in the same time frame . Ratchet and clank has 3 too . That fits right into my personal views that too many games in a limited time frame starts to ruin the experiance . Which i have said many times before .

I won't disagree that it's a lot of sequels, but you know, you could just pick one game from each of those series (the best, presumably), et voila, that's 3 original games that started life on the PS2. Just ignore the rest.

 

[DigitalSoul]

(I mean how many people are really going to play with 7 controllers on one TV let alone own 7 controllers?), another example of the "bigger is better" approach.

Ok, I don't everyone or anyone is going to play with 7 controllers. The controller uses bluetooth remember....bluetooth allows connection of up to 7 devices.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Huh?

they chose the most common, balanced choice and made it standard for all games.

They chose a standard that 80% of people won't see, at least for a good few years, and are forcing devs to write to that standard instead of giving them the option to aim for 480p if they want.

Regards 7 controllers, PS3 uses bluetooth that supports that many devices. The hardware that provides for 2 bluetooth controllers also provides for 7. Would it be smarter for Sony to artificially limit that to only 4 controllers? Considering the stick they got this gen for only supporting 2 controllers from the base unit, now they offer as much as anyone's likely to need, yet people still complain

I've said it elsewhere - Sony are a tech company. They create hardware and leave it for othes to decide how to use that hardware. They've created a console that'll allow 7 players at once (Bomberman anyone?) if anyone wants to write a program to use it, and 1080p output if anyone wants to use it, at no extra cost to the hardware then if they limited themselves to 4 controllers and 720p, and without forcing developers to adhere to a standard that might not be the way they want to do things. If no-one uses it, it's no loss.

I can't see either party as doing anything wrong on the hardware front. Sony may have a different PR strategy but they've always been that way. What else is a tech company gonna talk about but numbers? Sony a reknowned for their dull Powerpoint presentations full of stats! You won't get them being excited about new games. That's for the developers.

It's amazing how cynical and negative people can be...

 

[jvd]

I'm talking about their publishing portfolio, which has included a very healthy number of original titles.

are these developers for the games that sony publish exclusive ? Or can they jump to another console or publisher and become third party ?

Can you also list these devs so I can find out what games your talking about and see if they intrest me

I won't disagree that it's a lot of sequels, but you know, you could just pick one game from each of those series (the best, presumably), et voila, that's 3 original games that started life on the PS2. Just ignore the rest.

Well you could . But don't they have storys ? Don't the storys run into each other ? I dunno . I played jak a bit and wasn't impressed. Never tried the others though .

 

[Titanio]

I'm talking about their publishing portfolio, which has included a very healthy number of original titles.

are these developers for the games that sony publish exclusive ? Or can they jump to another console or publisher and become third party ?

Can you also list these devs so I can find out what games your talking about and see if they intrest me

I'm not sure how much clearer I can be, they're Sony-published games from first/second/third parties. I used the same criteria when comparing to MS.

If you wish to see what Sony's published just look it up on IGN or Gamespot.

Well you could . But don't they have storys ? Don't the storys run into each other ?

It's not like playing one compels you to play the others. You could pick any game up without having played the others. Unless you - *shock* - actually enjoy the games and want to play the other sequels too! But we all know you're not inclined toward that.

 

[jvd]

It's not like playing one compels you to play the others. Unless you - *shock* - actually enjoy the games and want to play the sequels! But we all know you're not inclined toward that.

It would be hard to enjoy a game if part 1 and 2 set up the story for part 3 and i'm totaly lost cause I didn't play them because the sugestion was to pick the best one