The one good thing about this gen and HDD's on systems is I never have to delete old save to make room for new ones. I have every save still on my HDD since I got my PS3 in early 2007.
I missed this feature on the first Ratchet and Clank Future but I guess it would be hard to get it to recognize a PS2 save over a PS3 one. Glad this has come back. #ratchet
@Hyperfludd: I think they were just using a standard template and didn't bother checking that. Reviewers have copies, so unless Insomniac pulls a Capcom/RE5 on us, I think I can safely say there will be no multiplayer/online outside of the community features shown. #ratchet
@Hyperfludd: It was a mistake. When they first fabricated the cover, someone accidently included the multiplayer label. Sadly, A Crack In Time has no multiplayer. Maybe next time? #ratchet
Heh, Ratchet games have been doing this for yonks.
I remember my first time playing Up Your Arsenal, with the save games from the original and Going Commando making the game so much easier.
Then I remember when my memory card got corrupted soon after that. When I tried playing Up Your Arsenal (but without the original and GC saves), the game was stupidly hard and I found myself ripping my hair off.
Ace Combat also did this. An AC04 save game in AC5 would unlock you the X-02 much earlier than usual, I think. Or was that AC0?
Either way, the ability to unlock an end-game superplane right off the bat makes the game much, much easier and much more fun. #ratchet
This is pretty cool! This reminds me that i have yet to finish tools of destruction, and now that i've beaten Batman and i'm nearing the 100%, i can get to revive my rachet and clank game. #ratchet
Wait, i have used to have a Ratchet & Clank Future :TOD save file with 100% but then i reformatted my ps3 so i lost it. Can i simply just start playing Ratchet & Clank Future: TOD up until a save point or do I need to beat it again?
I love ratchet and clank but i really don't feel like beating the game again because i am too busy with uncharted 2 right now.
@adam_andruko7: Hm.. I have the same issue. Both with R&C and Uncharted. Got both games, but my HDD is relatively new and I didn't backup my saves when I formatted. #ratchet
I love when games do this. Uncharted 2 gave you money if you beat (I think) Drake's Fortune. That's the most recent one I have come upon. It gives those people that are series fans and have played all the games some extra little bonus #ratchet
@zåɳzißårléɠёпȡ: Yeah, while you are in the shop if you press "square" (it should have it around the bottom of the screen, if I remember right) you'll get something like 100k. Not a super ton, but nice. #ratchet
I love when games do this. Uncharted 2 gave you money if you beat (I think) Drake's Fortune. That's the most recent one I have come upon. It gives those people that are series fans and have played all the games some extra little bonus #ratchet
@XODIS:
Exactly. It's better than nothing which most games do. Mass Effect will apparently do something similar to this but it will affect the storyline thanks to choices you made in the original. #ratchet
@DigitalHero: Unfortunately, Uncharted 2 doesn't give anything if you beat the original before trophies were patched in. I still have my completed game save, but I got nothing for it. I liked the original, but not enough to play it twice for trophies. #ratchet
@DigitalHero: And it doesn't work if you only have the trophies either...I finished the game (on normal) and have 61% of the trophies. But since my game save left me when the PS3 went in for repairs it doesn't recognize me trophies. #ratchet
@LunchBox55: That's not necessarily true. I copied my old game save to a memory stick and then created an entirely new game save. Got two medals on the boat at the beginning, switched back to U2, and got my $100k. Then just copy your old game save back over and you are set.
@DigitalHero: Oh, I know it is. But it still would be nice to get something for beating the game. I don't get why they can't check the save file instead of the achievement list. Considering most people play a game right after in comes out, it seems they are leaving a lot of people out. #ratchet
@DigitalHero: @LunchBox55:
What the trophy patch did is lock saves to their respective users, meaning that although you can copy over someone else's save, you won't be able to gain trophies while from that save. This is probably why the game ignore "pre-trophy" saves and probably why copied saves won't allow you to get the 100,000 bonus... #ratchet
@excel_excel: I can see Mass Effect being a massive headache/nightmare for the developers especially when people have grinded their characters to godlike status. #ratchet
@excel_excel: I suppose asking to carry over the 9,999,999 credits that me and likely many others were carrying by the end of that first game is asking a little too much. Heh, oh well.
As for the rest of the game, I've done a lot of reading about just how much of what you've done in the first game is reflected in the second, even seemingly insignificant missions. I can't wait for January. #ratchet
Nice, it's great to see developers reward loyal customers. Game developers should do this more often (I'd be impressed if one of them had the balls to make a save file from the first game effect the story of a game, that'd be amazing. Make the good ending only accessible if you resolved the problems in the first game). #ratchet
@b-radicate: Yeah thats it. I know one was general Raand or whatever his anme was.
I've tried my best to block out that series. I thought GOW2 was so disappointing at the end. I had a blast for the rest of the game but then it just sizzled out. If I grab GOW3 you can be sure I'll be as as rental or reduced price. #ratchet
It was a fine game until you got to the later levels and the controls just weren't up to the task. If they could fix that I would be happy to buy a new BH game, but having seen and played SEGA's past efforts at reviving old IP's I seriously doubt that they could manage it and would prefer that BH was left untouched.
Thinking about it for people who liked BH there is a game on the wii that is almost a spiritual successor, De Blob!
@excel_excel: You forget that Sonic was in a car before this. In fact, there was an entire racing game devoted to him. So yeah, this isn't another sign of Sega's slow death, just them repeating a strategy that worked for them in the past.
I've been looking foward to this game since I first laid my eyes on the trailer. But hearing that the game will only be 8 hours long? That's definitely disheartening. Takes me back to Heavenly Sword's beautiful but short game, if anything shorter games should cost less. especially when comparing games with other forms of entertainment like films. I live in New York City where the cost of a movie ticket is $12.50. A motion picture is typically 2 hours, if this game is 8 hours and after taxes the game comes to $65 bucks? I can watch 5 movies (10 hours aprox.) and still have change leftover. I love the style of the game but please respect the length of games as much as the presentation.
@mightygorilla: When you realize that that movies aren't interactive entertainment, get back to me. Oh, and prices aren't decided by how long something is, but by how fun it is. I'll take a 30 minute game I'll play 5,000 times over a 30-40 hour game I'll play once. Leave.
@Brodka: I totally agree, but while Shawns attitude is poor, his point is valid. Mighty says he has to pay $12.50 to see a movie. My guess is that's the price for both Harry Potter AND Bruno. Harry potter is 2.5 hours, Bruno is like one hour 20 minutes. Shall we start calculating cost per minute now? No. An 8 hour game may be short, and it may be well worth the money at the same time. I'd rather pay $60 for a great 8 hour game than a shitty 30 hour game. Sure, I'd like to have a great 30 hour game, but that's rarely the choice we're given as consumers. And besides, movies and games aren't really apples to apples entertainment comparisons. Especially if you consider, I may spend 20 hours beating an 8 hour game depending on my skill and the difficulty setting I choose.
@Brodka: Yeah, because we really need more people in this industry not buying games because they aren't long enough. It's completely warranted, and I'm pretty sure if you saw the % of people NOT buying games because of length you'd shut up immediately.
You know why we don't get new IP's? Because people like this need to leave the industry.
@Clushje: A tool? How? What's worse, the kid who has the opinion and reason to tell someone to leave, or the person who has to call names afterwards? You should probably follow suit. While you are at it, read my comment to Brodka. My leave makes sense, and stands.
@subnet6: My attitude really isn't poor. I'm just really sick of people getting in the way of companies making good games. Perfect example: Dead Space. The game is excellent, but the developers have already released the info on the sales vs. the amount of people who have played the game. Now they are going into all this stuff about the mistake of the game being too short, and so on. When 50% of the people who played your game didn't pay for it... well... how is my attitude bad? Now they are just going to make the next one longer, which is going to ruin it. I thought the first one was getting a little long at the end. Can't wait to explore the same damn ship for 20 hours this time!
Having a bad attitude and being realistic are two different things. I wish people would see it. I didn't call him names or anything, Nor was I like "Oh my god YOU SUCK" I just wish the opinion that you are paying for length would get the hell out of this industry.
@Shawnrw222: I could care less about your attitude, or whether or not your a tool. I agree. The length of a game DOES NOT determine the quality nor the price. So what if it's a short game it should be marked down? No that's ridiculous, if its a good game I'm willing to pay the full price and if its too short for some to warrant a day one purchase then wait for it go down in price. Shit, seriously guys.
@Shawnrw222: First, your attitude, IS poor. You don't even mention that I conceded your point was valid, you only go on a rant defending what you said. If you had read my comment with an open mind and positive attitude you'd realize that I more or less agreed with you and not felt the need to argue with me about something as unimportant as your attitude when we were in agreement on the actual point of your comment.
Anyway, yes, I agree, length should not dictate price. However, you say it yourself, you're tired of people making the length/value correlation. What does that mean? I'll tell you. It means a LOT of people think length is tied to value. While I don't necessarily agree, I respect the opinion. There are a lot of people out there who can't really tell a good game from a bad game. And while that is it's own challenge, it magnifies the situation you're complaining about. If a good game and a bad game are more or less equal, then the differentiating factor is length. I don't expect to solve this problem by telling people to leave the discussion. I'd rather try to convince them with examples and rational discussion. Honestly, wouldn't you? Think about it. If you're right (and I'm right) then we have that on our side. :)
Soldier_CLE says DON'T STOP AT THE STAR! REVOKE THE WHOLE DAMN THING, OWEN!!! was starred
Soldier_CLE says DON'T STOP AT THE STAR! REVOKE THE WHOLE DAMN THING, OWEN!!! was unstarred
@subnet6: My comment wasn't really directed at you. You brought up my attitude, and most were flaming me over it, so I was just making a statement on it in general. Sorry if you thought I was singling you out.
@mightygorilla: The point was that you probably have to pay $12.50 whether you see Harry Potter (2.5 hour movie) or Brune (1.4 hour movie). Things like entertainment aren't priced based on length of the experience. They are priced based on what the market can bear. This should not change. The key is to educate ourselves about which pieces of entertainment are "worth it" to US. As I said, I'd rather pay $60 for a fantastic 8 hour game, than a shitty 30 hour game. If you do what you advocate, you'll have developers focusing more on length, than on quality. I think that's bad for everyone.
@mightygorilla: "What I'm saying is that why does quality have to be sacrificed for a good chunk of gameplay length?"
It's called a budget. Games have to come in under a budget. When you have X million dollars to make a game, sometimes you have to make sacrifices, and the length vs. quality is a common one (or multiplayer vs. single player as you mention). So, the question remains, what do YOU want, a great 8-10 hour game, or a mediocre 30 hour game. Its VERY rare for a publisher to pony up enough money for a really high quality game that clocks in at 30 plus hours.
You say we should vote with our dollars by not paying $60 for short games. I'm telling you that the unintended consequence of that action will very likely be longer and lower quality games. Then what?
@bigdonthedj: Absolutely, I can't even begin to imagine what Oblivions budgetary constrictions looked like. My guess is a game like Oblivion costs 5-10 times more than a game like Wet. Why do you think the horse armor was so expensive? :)
10/22/09
I missed this feature on the first Ratchet and Clank Future but I guess it would be hard to get it to recognize a PS2 save over a PS3 one. Glad this has come back. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/23/09
10/22/09
I remember my first time playing Up Your Arsenal, with the save games from the original and Going Commando making the game so much easier.
Then I remember when my memory card got corrupted soon after that. When I tried playing Up Your Arsenal (but without the original and GC saves), the game was stupidly hard and I found myself ripping my hair off.
Ace Combat also did this. An AC04 save game in AC5 would unlock you the X-02 much earlier than usual, I think. Or was that AC0?
Either way, the ability to unlock an end-game superplane right off the bat makes the game much, much easier and much more fun. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
I love ratchet and clank but i really don't feel like beating the game again because i am too busy with uncharted 2 right now.
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
Exactly. It's better than nothing which most games do. Mass Effect will apparently do something similar to this but it will affect the storyline thanks to choices you made in the original. #ratchet
10/22/09
They need to keep doing this, it's a great incentive for people who have played the older title to buyer the newer one. #ratchet
10/22/09
This, however, is awesome. Every sequel should do this. Fans have been clamoring for it for some time now. Doing anything less is just lazy. #ratchet
10/22/09
The Uncharted 2 is no different. You used the money to buy new skins and such. It's basically the same thing. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
Well, that is your choice not to play it again. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
Well no shit Sherlock, whose else choice would it be? #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
[www.gamefaqs.com] #ratchet
10/22/09
Like I said to another poster, try someone elses save file. It MAY work.
[www.gamefaqs.com]
Copy it to a memory stick or USB flash and then copy it to your PS3. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
What the trophy patch did is lock saves to their respective users, meaning that although you can copy over someone else's save, you won't be able to gain trophies while from that save. This is probably why the game ignore "pre-trophy" saves and probably why copied saves won't allow you to get the 100,000 bonus... #ratchet
10/22/09
I wasn't sure but it didn't hurt to try. I cannot try it since I already used the bonus. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
As for the rest of the game, I've done a lot of reading about just how much of what you've done in the first game is reflected in the second, even seemingly insignificant missions. I can't wait for January. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
10/22/09
I know gears of war 2 did somethign like this if you had a certain achievement unlocked from GOW1. #ratchet
10/22/09
10/22/09
I've tried my best to block out that series. I thought GOW2 was so disappointing at the end. I had a blast for the rest of the game but then it just sizzled out. If I grab GOW3 you can be sure I'll be as as rental or reduced price. #ratchet
10/22/09
Sure, it's fun, when it works. Which is sad for such a high profile series.
I'll stick to CoD for my online shooting pleasures. #ratchet
08/21/09
*hums Billy Hatcher theme*
:D
I would love a brand new Billy Hatcher game. Regardless of initial reception, when I bought it, I loved it! ..but I'll love anything..
08/21/09
It was a fine game until you got to the later levels and the controls just weren't up to the task. If they could fix that I would be happy to buy a new BH game, but having seen and played SEGA's past efforts at reviving old IP's I seriously doubt that they could manage it and would prefer that BH was left untouched.
Thinking about it for people who liked BH there is a game on the wii that is almost a spiritual successor, De Blob!
08/21/09
Must control urge to buy Sega racing game with Sonic in car.....urge growing.....MUST HAVE HATCHER MOBILE!
08/21/09
08/21/09
Not those cheeks, pervs.
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
You know why we don't get new IP's? Because people like this need to leave the industry.
08/20/09
08/20/09
Having a bad attitude and being realistic are two different things. I wish people would see it. I didn't call him names or anything, Nor was I like "Oh my god YOU SUCK" I just wish the opinion that you are paying for length would get the hell out of this industry.
08/20/09
08/20/09
Anyway, yes, I agree, length should not dictate price. However, you say it yourself, you're tired of people making the length/value correlation. What does that mean? I'll tell you. It means a LOT of people think length is tied to value. While I don't necessarily agree, I respect the opinion. There are a lot of people out there who can't really tell a good game from a bad game. And while that is it's own challenge, it magnifies the situation you're complaining about. If a good game and a bad game are more or less equal, then the differentiating factor is length. I don't expect to solve this problem by telling people to leave the discussion. I'd rather try to convince them with examples and rational discussion. Honestly, wouldn't you? Think about it. If you're right (and I'm right) then we have that on our side. :)
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
It's called a budget. Games have to come in under a budget. When you have X million dollars to make a game, sometimes you have to make sacrifices, and the length vs. quality is a common one (or multiplayer vs. single player as you mention). So, the question remains, what do YOU want, a great 8-10 hour game, or a mediocre 30 hour game. Its VERY rare for a publisher to pony up enough money for a really high quality game that clocks in at 30 plus hours.
You say we should vote with our dollars by not paying $60 for short games. I'm telling you that the unintended consequence of that action will very likely be longer and lower quality games. Then what?
08/21/09
08/22/09