PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft is assuring that the Xbox will die a quick death


vniow
Sep 23, 2002, 11:09 PM
Well, maybe they don't to dominate the gaming market that bad.....

Microsoft has changed the internal configuration of its Xbox game console, a move intended to thwart hackers and lower manufacturing costs.

Word of the changes began spreading on sites devoted Xbox hacking, with some buyers of recently manufactured Xbox units complaining that mod chips designed for the original console won't work now.

Microsoft Xbox spokeswoman Molly O'Donnell confirmed that the company had made minor changes to the console's configuration as part of ongoing efforts to "increase security and reduce overall costs."



Reduce costs? Maybe, but you can't say Microsoft and security in the same sentence while keping a straight face.
This may also be the result of their search to hire a hacker. (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-957160.html)
Sux for those few of you who actually like the Xbox, modding game systems is part of the fun.:p

click (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-959084.html?tag=fd_top)

Mr. Anderson
Sep 24, 2002, 08:26 AM
Originally posted by edvniow

Sux for those few of you who actually like the Xbox, modding game systems is part of the fun.:p

considering that the 'mods' are just for using illeagally copied games, I can't see this being all that surprising. And I'm sure its just a matter of time before someone comes out with something that bypasses these fixes....

D

AmigaMac
Sep 24, 2002, 10:08 AM
The Xbox was dead on arrival anyways... it will live the same ultimate demise as the NEC TurboGrafix 16, the Panasonic 3DO, the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!

MacBandit
Sep 24, 2002, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by dukestreet


considering that the 'mods' are just for using illeagally copied games, I can't see this being all that surprising. And I'm sure its just a matter of time before someone comes out with something that bypasses these fixes....

D


Mods also allow you to use foreign games i.e. early releases from Japan. At least for the PS2.

spinner
Sep 24, 2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit



Mods also allow you to use foreign games i.e. early releases from Japan. At least for the PS2.


A friend of mine had a PS1 with a mod chip and it allowed him to play foreign games as well as burned copies of games. Let's just say that he didn't buy a lot of games. ;)

allpar
Sep 24, 2002, 12:00 PM
What you fail to take into account is the fact that Microsoft rarely admits defeat, and there is no reason why they should. They have infinite money at their disposal. MSN has been stumbling along for years and I have NO doubt that it will eventually replace AOL as the #1 ISP in the nation...and the world...and that the rest of 'em will eventually fail except for the cable companies and a few locals (MAYBE). When people saw the market share for Word, they laughed at Microsoft's challenge to WordPerfect...same as they did with Excel vs Lotus 1-2-3, MS networking vs Novell, MS small business accounting, Windows 1.0 and 2.0, Windows web servers, and a huge number of others. Don't forget that MS owns enough media to control the opinions of the masses... and if they took off the gloves, it would be far worse than at the moment, where they just influence MSNBC, NBC, MSN, a bunch of analysts, eWeek, and anyone else who they advertise with.

Wonder whatever happened to that antitrust suit? Seems to have disappeared from the public eye.

NatronB
Sep 24, 2002, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by AmigaMac
The Xbox was dead on arrival anyways... it will live the same ultimate demise as the NEC TurboGrafix 16, the Panasonic 3DO, the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!

Whenever I hear someone knock Xbox, I smile, and happily return to slaughtering the Covenant masses....

Then I think of Halo 2, and smile again.....:)

Soma_Addict
Sep 24, 2002, 02:01 PM
i find it extremely comical whenever an Xboxer defends their system of choice with only one game. two if you count the sequel. it is like saying that a band is very good although they are only a one hit wonder. a one hit wonder that bought another band so that they could have exclusive rights.

paying a ton of money for other peoples creative efforts does not sound like a solid business practice to me.

Chisholm
Sep 24, 2002, 02:05 PM
Anybody want to buy my Xbox? It has Halo an a Tony Hawk game and a 5 year extended warranty from Circuit City. Maybe 4 hours of use total. Cheap...

BongHits
Sep 24, 2002, 02:07 PM
you'd be hard pressed to find a better (more profitable) business model than MS...the only company making more money is the Saudi Arabian Princes oil company, and that's just because the US (wealthiest nation) is nearly 100% dependant on oil from this region (i realize their is oil in alaska and venezuela, but not nearly as much.)

NatronB
Sep 24, 2002, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by Soma_Addict
i find it extremely comical whenever an Xboxer defends their system of choice with only one game. two if you count the sequel. it is like saying that a band is very good although they are only a one hit wonder. a one hit wonder that bought another band so that they could have exclusive rights....

have you played Halo?

I love my Mac, but it doesn't play Halo, and neither does yours...:)

AssassinOfGates
Sep 24, 2002, 03:09 PM
In case you havent heard, Halo is comming to mac, so its worth the wait, especially since Bungie originated on Mac. Shame M$ bought it. And shame that M$ bought RAREware. Damn now GC wont get Perfect Dark 2 or any other RARE games after starfox and donkeykong. Instead, they will be brought to Xbox, just like DOA3 and halo was. Im seeing another anti-competetion trend here, and I hope the DOJ can get up off their corrupt asses and actually prevent yet another monopoly in the making.

iwantanewmac
Sep 24, 2002, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by AssassinOfGates
In case you havent heard, Halo is comming to mac, so its worth the wait, especially since Bungie originated on Mac.


Uh yeah.
Halo "has been coming to the mac" for ages......
Damn I wouldn't wait for a game.......

dongmin
Sep 24, 2002, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by NatronB


have you played Halo?

I love my Mac, but it doesn't play Halo, and neither does yours...:)

As soon as Doom 3 and UT 2003 comes out, Halo will be a distant memory for hardcore gamers...

peterjhill
Sep 24, 2002, 05:20 PM
thread rehash

We have been down this road before, but I wil say that I will buy an Xbox when Halo2 comes out. I have finished the first one, and love it. I have seen the trailer for the next one, and am very excited. Other games are just gravy to me. A decent racing game and I will be happier.

I am not an avid console gamer, though. At least not since I got married ;-) At the current price of the machine, it is a great deal.

Kid Red
Sep 24, 2002, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by BongHits
you'd be hard pressed to find a better (more profitable) business model than MS...the only company making more money is the Saudi Arabian Princes oil company, and that's just because the US (wealthiest nation) is nearly 100% dependant on oil from this region (i realize their is oil in alaska and venezuela, but not nearly as much.)

All good (debateable) things come to an end. MS lost like 15 billion last quater or something that knocked Bills income down some. His and MS's time is numbered IMO and I am excited about Apple's future.

Angelus
Sep 24, 2002, 06:12 PM
Its a shame to see Nintendo letting go of Rare.Granted they havent been on the radar much over the last year(with the exception of starfox adventures) but they created some of the best and most unique games on the N64.Goldeneye was a masterpiece with infinite replayability. Then when Goldeneye seemed to be loosing its edge out came Perfect Dark,another tour de force.I was looking forward to playing PD2 an all but now i guess it will be XBox exclusive.Its a shame cos Rare have real talent and they put so much effort and attention to detail into their games. I loved their attitude in that they cared little for release schedules simply because they werent willing to release a game unless it was perfect(pardon the pun).

Anyways that my two cents on the matter.

P.S does anyone here remember Blast Corps for the N64?What a game!

Soma_Addict
Sep 24, 2002, 08:53 PM
have you played Halo?

I love my Mac, but it doesn't play Halo, and neither does yours...

yes i have played Halo and it is a pretty good game. the physics engine is very well done. but paying $340(system and two games +Tax) dollars into the pocket of a company that i do not respect and have a hard time supporting just to play 2 games(Halo and Halo 2) is a bit much.

i guess it comes down to how badly one needs to pay for entertainment.

MacBandit
Sep 24, 2002, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by allpar
What you fail to take into account is the fact that Microsoft rarely admits defeat, and there is no reason why they should. They have infinite money at their disposal. MSN has been stumbling along for years and I have NO doubt that it will eventually replace AOL as the #1 ISP in the nation...and the world...and that the rest of 'em will eventually fail except for the cable companies and a few locals (MAYBE). When people saw the market share for Word, they laughed at Microsoft's challenge to WordPerfect...same as they did with Excel vs Lotus 1-2-3, MS networking vs Novell, MS small business accounting, Windows 1.0 and 2.0, Windows web servers, and a huge number of others. Don't forget that MS owns enough media to control the opinions of the masses... and if they took off the gloves, it would be far worse than at the moment, where they just influence MSNBC, NBC, MSN, a bunch of analysts, eWeek, and anyone else who they advertise with.

Wonder whatever happened to that antitrust suit? Seems to have disappeared from the public eye.

I really doubt there is anyway that MSN can ever compete agains AOL/Time Warner in money. Also I've been waiting for Sony to get pissed and just buy Microsoft. Microsoft does not have a lot of money in the big scheme of things they just have a lot of money for a software only company.

MacBandit
Sep 24, 2002, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by Soma_Addict
have you played Halo?

I love my Mac, but it doesn't play Halo, and neither does yours...

yes i have played Halo and it is a pretty good game. the physics engine is very well done. but paying $340(system and two games +Tax) dollars into the pocket of a company that i do not respect and have a hard time supporting just to play 2 games(Halo and Halo 2) is a bit much.

i guess it comes down to how badly one needs to pay for entertainment.


I refuse to play Halo for 1 reason. I drooled over Halo for 2 years in the Mac magazines then Microsoft bought Bungie and they said they wouldn't bring it to the Mac. Then they said they would but where is it. This really makes me despise Microsoft. They knew they were buying the #1 maker of Mac games and they new Bungie had a winner on there hands so they screwed us all.

noht*
Sep 25, 2002, 07:07 AM
Originally posted by AmigaMac
The Xbox was dead on arrival anyways... it will live the same ultimate demise as the NEC TurboGrafix 16, the Panasonic 3DO, the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!

no way...the turbografx, more correctly the PC-Engine, was one of the most successful consoles in japan. the 3do was an attempt at creating a pc-like standard based on which any company could build their version. panasonic and goldstar ended up being the only ones to actually ship, i believe, but toshiba, sanyo and AT&T are said to have had prototypes; still it was a very influential design. the jaguar was even more ground-breaking (first console with a 64-bit design), but suffered the usual catastrophic atari PR. the dreamcast is, well, the dreamcast. it has its own special niche for conversions and 'freak' games, and i know arcade-nuts that would never give their dreamcast away.
no system is dead on arrival. the psx is the best example. made by a company with no prior experience in this particular market, sony could use its immense size to 'force' its system into competion with aggressive advertising and pricing. i remember game magazines that gave the psx no more than 6 months...well they were proven wrong. microsoft is a similar example. they may not have had the expertise to build the über-console they intended to, but they certainly know something about marketing.
that said, i must admit that there are systems that were born dead. anyone remember the nintendo virtual boy, for example..?
(note: i don't own a xbox. i just don't agree with the dominant opinion that the xbox is a bad design, has no future, and is just generally a Bad Thing)
as for rare, yes, that's a true shame. but it just shows microsoft's strategy, which, unfortunatly, has proven to be quite effective. if you can't copy them, buy'em.

just some thoughts

noht

elohim01
Sep 25, 2002, 09:00 AM
From MacBandit:

"Also I've been waiting for Sony to get pissed and just buy Microsoft. Microsoft does not have a lot of money in the big scheme of things they just have a lot of money for a software only company."

Geez, you would think a mac user would have more sense to do some decent research and discover that Microsoft has a net worth of over triple that of Sony.

People these days...:rolleyes:

MacBandit
Sep 25, 2002, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by elohim01
From MacBandit:

"Also I've been waiting for Sony to get pissed and just buy Microsoft. Microsoft does not have a lot of money in the big scheme of things they just have a lot of money for a software only company."

Geez, you would think a mac user would have more sense to do some decent research and discover that Microsoft has a net worth of over triple that of Sony.

People these days...:rolleyes:

Do you not know that Sony is owned by deep pockets in Japan. Every face company that we deal with from Japan is. Panasonic is owned by Matsu****a etc..

Jeez :rolleyes: :D

pretentious
Sep 25, 2002, 02:04 PM
This whole 'Xbox' fiasco should just go and prove to the rest of the world that Microsoft cannot make a worthwhile product, esp. in the hardware dept.. Can anyone say 'WebTV'?


BTW I think I read somewhere that Apple had made some type of its own game console, but I can't seem to find any more information on that. (Maybe it was all in my head?):confused:

dwishbone
Sep 25, 2002, 02:33 PM
apples console was called the Pippin.
good concept. lots of flaws. bad timing and PR.

dantec
Sep 25, 2002, 03:36 PM
Ok, here in Europe, the Xbox isn't selling for ****. Every time I go to a store, I still see a pile of around 17 Xboxes compared to the 20 I saw 3 weeks ago...

But in reality I think the Gamecube is doomed far beyond the Xbox. Microsoft really has the income and the weight of pushing developers for the Xbox. You can see this with the annoucement of Metal Gear Solid 3 for Xbox. So large game developers are following suit and developing a version for PS2 and a couple months later porting it to Xbox. However the gamecube, made by nintendo, is a great product in nature, but Nintendo can't push its weight around as much, and therefore I think is left behind.

Especially here in Europe the gamecube is refered to as the 'youngsters console'. The PS2 is by far the most popular with the more 'gory' games and the Xbox isn't far behind.

Disagree with me that is OK... just giving the European perspective over here...

Maybe I'm just bashing the gamecube cause it has an ATI chip... who knows... ;)

{1984}
Sep 25, 2002, 04:19 PM
i was never too fond of console games... im glad they are gonna kill xbox

chrisfx811
Sep 25, 2002, 06:37 PM
nintendo's long term plans look alot like sega's recent course of action. soon they may be a game software company since that's where they excel. microsoft is already planning to expand the xbox's capabilities (homestation anyone?) they may not catch up to ps2 very soon, but developers have pretty much maxed out the ps2, while the xbox is just getting started. since ps3 is about 3-4 years away i wouldn't expect too much ground-breaking gameplay from the sony side , but they can always push the sequels to their great games like gta3 and gran turismo

dantec
Sep 26, 2002, 01:41 AM
Originally posted by chrisfx811
nintendo's long term plans look alot like sega's recent course of action. soon they may be a game software company since that's where they excel. microsoft is already planning to expand the xbox's capabilities (homestation anyone?) they may not catch up to ps2 very soon, but developers have pretty much maxed out the ps2, while the xbox is just getting started. since ps3 is about 3-4 years away i wouldn't expect too much ground-breaking gameplay from the sony side , but they can always push the sequels to their great games like gta3 and gran turismo

I couldn't agree more.

hacurio
Sep 26, 2002, 02:29 AM
Originally posted by elohim01
From MacBandit:

"Also I've been waiting for Sony to get pissed and just buy Microsoft. Microsoft does not have a lot of money in the big scheme of things they just have a lot of money for a software only company."

Geez, you would think a mac user would have more sense to do some decent research and discover that Microsoft has a net worth of over triple that of Sony.

People these days...:rolleyes:

Actually Microsoft is not as big as everybody thinks, it ranks 201 worldwide. Sony is ranks 30 and Matsu****a ranks 26.

http://www.areport.com/

This links will show you annual reports and revenues.

MacBandit
Sep 26, 2002, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by hacurio


Actually Microsoft is not as big as everybody thinks, it ranks 201 worldwide. Sony is ranks 30 and Matsu****a ranks 26.

http://www.areport.com/

This links will show you annual reports and revenues.


I knew this I just didn't know where to look for it.

MacBandit
Sep 26, 2002, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by hacurio


Actually Microsoft is not as big as everybody thinks, it ranks 201 worldwide. Sony is ranks 30 and Matsu****a ranks 26.

http://www.areport.com/

This links will show you annual reports and revenues.



Here is something interesting. Motorola ranks higher then intel. I wouldn't have guessed that. Though if you think about it Motorola has there hands in more cookie jars.

MacBandit
Sep 26, 2002, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by chrisfx811
nintendo's long term plans look alot like sega's recent course of action. soon they may be a game software company since that's where they excel. microsoft is already planning to expand the xbox's capabilities (homestation anyone?) they may not catch up to ps2 very soon, but developers have pretty much maxed out the ps2, while the xbox is just getting started. since ps3 is about 3-4 years away i wouldn't expect too much ground-breaking gameplay from the sony side , but they can always push the sequels to their great games like gta3 and gran turismo


Hey read this.

http://www.panasonic.com/MECA/press_releases/nintendo_99.05.12.html

Nintendo has big bucks help. I don't think they will be sinking any time soon. If they do start going down I think they will be combined with Panasonic. Panasonic already has a Game Qube of there own.

See it at the bottom of this page.

http://www.zeldaguide.com/gamecube/backroun

pretentious
Sep 26, 2002, 10:47 AM
Nintendo has big bucks help. I don't think they will be sinking any time soon. If they do start going down I think they will be combined with Panasonic. Panasonic already has a Game Qube of there own.

If they would of sold that dvd version here for a decent price, they could a chance. Frankly I new a lot of people who got the PS2 just because it came w/ a DVD player (before Xbox was out). that looks so much more palitable than the US version.

mstur
Sep 26, 2002, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by allpar
What you fail to take into account is the fact that Microsoft rarely admits defeat, and there is no reason why they should. They have infinite money at their disposal. MSN has been stumbling along for years and I have NO doubt that it will eventually replace AOL as the #1 ISP in the nation...and the world...and that the rest of 'em will eventually fail except for the cable companies and a few locals (MAYBE).

Wonder whatever happened to that antitrust suit? Seems to have disappeared from the public eye.

Everyone - and also every company - will perish sooner or later, and there is NO infinite amount of money.

Errors cumulate, and - just think of Enron !

Question yourself: Is life possible without using a MS product ? Definitely yes, and even very easily ;-)

chrisfx811
Sep 26, 2002, 11:49 AM
sorry, i wasn't implying that nintendo was going under, i was just refering to an article i read where someone from nintendo was indicating the possibility that the big "n" would eventually make cross-platform games. actually their system probably has the quickest roi of the 3 systems available, it's just that they are not pursuing any of the new technologies in gaming. look at their take on the online gaming market... everything from them is tba. by no means will they go under, much like sega did not go under, in actuality they are flourishing more by focusing on their strength.. game making. hopefully there will continue to be choices in the console gaming community, cuz as mac fans we all know choice is good. when ps1 was virtually the only game in town (no offense to n64) look at how many crappy games you had to sift through to get to the good ones. microsoft is doing a decent job of separating their name from the xbox in advertising and such, because they obviously know that is the best way to go. so i hope the xbox flourishes in the future, because as of now it has the power to run the games of tomorrow. if it weren't for xbox and gc, console gamers would all be in a sony world with memory stick slots in the back of their head for uploading game preferences to their ps3.

Stillman
Sep 26, 2002, 04:24 PM
Firstly Nintendo is nothing like Sega. As a business, Nintendo has always outperformed Sega even in the 16-bits days, even when Sega outsold them they made more profit. For three years now, Nintendo has topped Nikkei as the best performing company. Sega had two consecutive failures - Saturn and Dreamcast, they are forced to exit the hardware market. Nintendo, on the otherhand, makes more profit from games than even Sony, Microsoft and EA. I do not see any reason that would push Nintendo to change their current business model.

Nintendo has always been a conservative company without the aggression of Sony or Microsoft. They are not betting on online games, but only time will tell if that is a mistake or not. It is my opinion that Microsoft may be over estimating on the attraction of online gaming.

Microsoft doesn't really have much 'weight' in the console market. They cannot push developers around. Xbox has a slight edge over Gamecube in the US, but it is lagging in Europe and is almost dead in Japan. Developers will not put games on a console with the narrowest audience. Ports that it is getting like 'Dead to Rights' will not shift units. Sony is just invincible with the PS2 brand. Nintendo's first-party titles are the best in the industry and Nintendo have got developers like Capcom (with Resident Evil series), Namco, Sega and even Square supporting them now.

Ok, there's Halo, but Halo 2 is not coming until the end of next year. I'm not sure whether buying Rare for $400 million (of which about 49% goes to Nintendo) is the best decision. Rare is not a very strong brand and it does not have very strong franchises. A lot of talent from the Goldeneye days have left Rare and it is not a sure-fire bet for MS. Whatever the outcome of the Rare deal, MS just can't buy a developer every time they need an exclusive. Someone in Redmond is bound to notice that money spent on Xbox can be better spent elsewhere if this trend continues.

chrisfx811
Sep 26, 2002, 05:32 PM
yeah your probably right, ms is just buying companies without doing any research into the purchase. they're probably just thumbing through the yellow pages saying "hmmmm rare, i don't think we've bought anybody out that start's with the letter "r" yet... send them a check asap!" again i was not saying nintendo is going under i was just restating what i read in an interview with a nintendo exec.
if i'm correct, i do believe sega is and was an awesome game maker and that didn't help dreamcast and saturn much did it? as for the ps2, game developers constantly bitched that the architecture was too difficult and it would cost way too much to make good games for it, but they had no choice cuz it was basically the only console in town at the time. well now xbox comes along with more power and developer friendly architecture, so there will be more choices. i've said it a few times already, but sony has no problem dumping money on companies to lock up exclusive titles and nobody says a thing, but when ms does it... some people just cry for no apparent reason! gta3 is a great game, but seriously, it would look better and play smoother on xbox. devil may cry wouldn't look so jaggie. right now ps2 has a huge installed base and that's tough to overcome, but we have seen the limits of what the ps2 can do, and if you are satisfied with the next 3 or 4 years of games looking the way they do now, then you are not a true game fan, you just want to see ms fall on their face. with xbox and to some extend gamecube we can have games that are graphically on par with pc's, and even though it is 2 different markets it is still nice to have georgeous games if your a console fan and don't like playing games with a ridiculous keyboard and mouse. and as for halo and halo2 being the only games on xbox... what r u talking about? it has the best selection of sports games period, one of the best fighters doa3.. with more to come, brute force, splinter cell, doom 3, the best version of spider man, max payne, splashdown, wreckless, segagt 2002, panzer dragoon, etc. the only games you can bitch about are the cross-platform games that don't take advantage of xbox hardware... and who do you blame for that... the developers or in ea's case, i'm sure sony's deep pockets have something to do with it

MacBandit
Sep 26, 2002, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by pretentious


If they would of sold that dvd version here for a decent price, they could a chance. Frankly I new a lot of people who got the PS2 just because it came w/ a DVD player (before Xbox was out). that looks so much more palitable than the US version.


Did you read the my post and the links? Nintendo does not have a DVD version Panasonic does. So this is not a US/Japan issue it's a Nintendo/Panasonic issue. Panasonic has chosen not to import there Qube. The bucks I'm talking about for Nintendo would be coming from Panasonic/Matsu****a one of the biggest companies in the world.

Just clarifying.:)

hvfsl
Sep 27, 2002, 07:15 AM
In history it is always the most powerful console that fails or does least well. For example, the NES vs Sega Master System, SNES vs Mega Drive/Genesis and the PSX vs N64. So I am expecting the xBox to do the least well as it is. Around 5 million more people have the GameCube over the xBox worldwide.

Also about the apple games console the Pipin, it was actually more powerful then the PSX and actualy had a few games made for it in Japan.

Stillman
Sep 27, 2002, 07:21 PM
chris, i agree with what you said but I think you misunderstood some of the things I said. 1) Sega was a great games company, but it never learnt how to make money. Nintendo does. Look at Gamecube, it's a console that can stand alongside Xbox in terms of power, but it can have a price tag of £129 (in UK) without nintendo losing any money while Xbox sells for £159 and Microsoft still has to lose something like £200 per console. A lot of people have IMO mistook Nintendo's direct Iwata-san's words when he said that their focus is on software and that the hardware competition is maxed out. What I think he means is that graphics on consoles have reached a point that the simply improved graphics PS3 or Xbox2 may not be able to convince consumers to take in new hardware, Nintendo thinks that the videogames industry in general needs to rethink its direction of development or the public would lose interest in the medium otherwise.

When I said Xbox has only got Halo, I meant that Halo is the only game that can actually convince people to buy an Xbox. Even with Halo, it is not immediately attractive to people outside the US. The other games you mentioned are good, but with the exception of Panzer dragoon, none of them are special enough to sell the console. Games like Splinter Cell and Doom III are coming out on other platforms. Of course, I think Xbox is technically the best console (not the best controller though) and it have the best versions of multiplatform games, but that isn't enough. People who love games will love Xbox (even if only for Halo), but the majority of gamers don't really care if Xbox is really slightly better than PS2.
Xbox may become the hardcore gamer's holy grail, but by being that it is only taking the place of Dreamcast, another consoles with good games overlooked by the public.

I guess microsoft is aan easy target for bitching because it is the newbie in the console world. Sony and Nintendo buy exclusives, but they are not bitched about because they have solid first-party titles themselves, something Microsoft did not have. Sony make innovative games like ICO. And Nintendo...i don't think i'll need to go further. MS is seen as buying their way in without any substance themselves. And there is always the fear that if MS succeeds in dominating the console market, our living rooms, then it'll decend into what we see in the PC world.

iShater
Sep 27, 2002, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by MacBandit


I really doubt there is anyway that MSN can ever compete agains AOL/Time Warner in money. Also I've been waiting for Sony to get pissed and just buy Microsoft. Microsoft does not have a lot of money in the big scheme of things they just have a lot of money for a software only company.

Here is a link to Fortune 500's most profitable companies, MS is way ahead of AOL.

http://www.fortune.com/lists/F500/topperf_co_mostproft_mill.html

vniow
Sep 27, 2002, 08:31 PM
Hmmmm, started interesting thread I did, no? Hmmmmm..............:p

MacBandit
Sep 27, 2002, 09:11 PM
Originally posted by iShater


Here is a link to Fortune 500's most profitable companies, MS is way ahead of AOL.

http://www.fortune.com/lists/F500/topperf_co_mostproft_mill.html


Hmm? I don't know what you saw but I just checked it and AOL/Time Warner is number 37 with revenues of 38.234Billion. Microsoft is number 72 with 25.296Billion. That's a big difference and not ahead as you said. This is the top 500 revenues list which would give you an idea of the size of the company not it's profitability. They are a much bigger company with much more cash to throw around.

BongHits
Sep 27, 2002, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by Stillman
chris, i agree with what you said but I think you misunderstood some of the things I said. 1) Sega was a great games company, but it never learnt how to make money. Nintendo does. Look at Gamecube, it's a console that can stand alongside Xbox in terms of power, but it can have a price tag of £129 (in UK) without nintendo losing any money while Xbox sells for £159 and Microsoft still has to lose something like £200 per console. A lot of people have IMO mistook Nintendo's direct Iwata-san's words when he said that their focus is on software and that the hardware competition is maxed out. What I think he means is that graphics on consoles have reached a point that the simply improved graphics PS3 or Xbox2 may not be able to convince consumers to take in new hardware, Nintendo thinks that the videogames industry in general needs to rethink its direction of development or the public would lose interest in the medium otherwise.

When I said Xbox has only got Halo, I meant that Halo is the only game that can actually convince people to buy an Xbox. Even with Halo, it is not immediately attractive to people outside the US. The other games you mentioned are good, but with the exception of Panzer dragoon, none of them are special enough to sell the console. Games like Splinter Cell and Doom III are coming out on other platforms. Of course, I think Xbox is technically the best console (not the best controller though) and it have the best versions of multiplatform games, but that isn't enough. People who love games will love Xbox (even if only for Halo), but the majority of gamers don't really care if Xbox is really slightly better than PS2.
Xbox may become the hardcore gamer's holy grail, but by being that it is only taking the place of Dreamcast, another consoles with good games overlooked by the public.

I guess microsoft is aan easy target for bitching because it is the newbie in the console world. Sony and Nintendo buy exclusives, but they are not bitched about because they have solid first-party titles themselves, something Microsoft did not have. Sony make innovative games like ICO. And Nintendo...i don't think i'll need to go further. MS is seen as buying their way in without any substance themselves. And there is always the fear that if MS succeeds in dominating the console market, our living rooms, then it'll decend into what we see in the PC world.

i agree with it all 100% aside from the isse about xbox's controlller...dde i love that thing! when i use my ps2 for more than 15 min. my hands become extremely cramped and i ineed to periodically stop and stretch out my fingers. When using my Xbox (for halo) i can rip it up for over an hour with no aches or pains, i think they were going for that "ergonomic" feel, which unfortunately requires spacing your hands somewhat apart (moreso than the ps2 allows) and having the controller fit into the form of your and, rather than mold it to the form of the controller (ie M$'s ergonomic mouse, which now all mice are shaped like)

MacBandit
Sep 27, 2002, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by Stillman
A lot of people have IMO mistook Nintendo's direct Iwata-san's words when he said that their focus is on software and that the hardware competition is maxed out. What I think he means is that graphics on consoles have reached a point that the simply improved graphics PS3 or Xbox2 may not be able to convince consumers to take in new hardware, Nintendo thinks that the videogames industry in general needs to rethink its direction of development or the public would lose interest in the medium otherwise.


I disagree completely I'm ready to shell out for a new PS3 right now. I've been playing mine for nearly two years and I want more. :D

dantec
Sep 28, 2002, 02:39 AM
The X-BOX controller SUCKS ! The PS2 is just right, and the gamecube is nice, but sometimes I find the joystick and keypad should be interchanged.

The X-box controller, seems like a keybord that was painted black and wraped around a small logic board. The thing is huge, and those four colorfull buttons... You can only get to one, withtout straining your hand !

What I do know... is that here in Europe, we all of a sudden have PS2's frying themselves up. Just a couple days ago my friends PS2 died. Same with another friend who had is PS2 die 6 weeks ago... I'm just hoping mine will last out long enough... ;)

The wierd thing, is it would be cheaper to buy a new one, rather than repair it...

Stillman
Sep 28, 2002, 04:39 AM
Interesting, PS2s dying? Hmm...Funny that as Capcoms Resident Evil's creator recently bashed the PS2 and also claimed that Sony intentionally makes PS2s break down so people have to buy new ones. I would believe him as the Japanese sales figures for PS2 is unbelievably high all the time, one would think everyone in Japan would have two or three PS2s by now.

PS I've just heard that Panasonic is bringing out a new version of Q that has a TiVO like TV recorder. I wonder how much it'll cost. I think Panasonic/ Matshu****a wants have a piece of the pie in the console world and not let Sony dominate the living room but they know their brand is not strong enough, which is why they're doing it through Nintendo.

MacBandit
Sep 28, 2002, 04:48 AM
I got my PS2 the day they were released here in the US about 2 years ago and I have used it nearly every day for DVD or game and it has never had a problem or failure.

chrisfx811
Sep 28, 2002, 08:19 AM
stillman i agree with alot what u said. as for the debate on the controller... i think the ps2 has become the standard because the ps1 dominated the console market for 4 or 5 years. i do agree that it has a great button layout and is more suited to fit into a wide variety of gamers hands. i think the first xbox controller was too focussed on their target market of young adults age 16-30, mostly males who tend to have bigger hands. i think they did a decent job of remedying the situation with the "s" version although i would have liked a more direct copy of the japanese version, cuz i still feel the start and select buttons are in a silly place now. as for the nintendo controller...if you like sports games don't even bother, the button pad is not symmetrical and lends itself better to action/rpg/vehicular games that forcus on a primary action button with other buttons being secondary. there controller seems to be to specific for the types of games they produce and focus on and not very friendly towards a variety of genres, not to mention the cheap plastic feel of it.
as for ps2's reliability, my brother has replaced his, but luckily he purchased a replacement guarantee from eb, so it was no charge. thus far (knock on wood) my xbox has not had any probs yet. and i really don't think making the gamecube an all in one type machine is that great of an idea. it was made small for a reason and if you stick too much add on technology into it i think it will affect performance. what sounds better an all-in-one stereo or a component system? microsoft would gain more respect by producing better first party games to gather a strong following, but that's not their forte right now, so i think they are doing the only other thing they know how to do... buy them! do you guys remeember sony's first party sports games from 989 studios?? those things suck more than my $750 vacuum cleaner! the reality of future game development is we will see many more cross-platform games and a select few exclusive blockbusters. nintendo makes their own, microsoft buys theirs, and sony leverages their huge market share and tosses ad $$$ to the developers. unfortunately for us, sony's technology in the ps2 is pretty tapped out, so if the other consoles gain market share, cross-platform games will not always be created equal. t.v. programming is always the same, but i still have an hdtv cuz it looks better in my living room , same goes for my choice of getting an xbox primarily. although, with the new gta3 i will probably be giving the ps2 some extra attention this year

job
Sep 28, 2002, 09:01 AM
This is very off-topic, but dantec, I saw you are in need of a 'tar.

Will this do? :)

Chisholm
Sep 28, 2002, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by chrisfx811
stillman i agree with alot what u said. as for the debate on the controller... i think the ps2 has become the standard because the ps1 dominated the console market for 4 or 5 years. i do agree that it has a great button layout and is more suited to fit into a wide variety of gamers hands. i think the first xbox controller was too focussed on their target market of young adults age 16-30, mostly males who tend to have bigger hands. i think they did a decent job of remedying the situation with the "s" version although i would have liked a more direct copy of the japanese version, cuz i still feel the start and select buttons are in a silly place now. as for the nintendo controller...if you like sports games don't even bother, the button pad is not symmetrical and lends itself better to action/rpg/vehicular games that forcus on a primary action button with other buttons being secondary. there controller seems to be to specific for the types of games they produce and focus on and not very friendly towards a variety of genres, not to mention the cheap plastic feel of it.
as for ps2's reliability, my brother has replaced his, but luckily he purchased a replacement guarantee from eb, so it was no charge. thus far (knock on wood) my xbox has not had any probs yet. and i really don't think making the gamecube an all in one type machine is that great of an idea. it was made small for a reason and if you stick too much add on technology into it i think it will affect performance. what sounds better an all-in-one stereo or a component system? microsoft would gain more respect by producing better first party games to gather a strong following, but that's not their forte right now, so i think they are doing the only other thing they know how to do... buy them! do you guys remeember sony's first party sports games from 989 studios?? those things suck more than my $750 vacuum cleaner! the reality of future game development is we will see many more cross-platform games and a select few exclusive blockbusters. nintendo makes their own, microsoft buys theirs, and sony leverages their huge market share and tosses ad $$$ to the developers. unfortunately for us, sony's technology in the ps2 is pretty tapped out, so if the other consoles gain market share, cross-platform games will not always be created equal. t.v. programming is always the same, but i still have an hdtv cuz it looks better in my living room , same goes for my choice of getting an xbox primarily. although, with the new gta3 i will probably be giving the ps2 some extra attention this year

:eek: Dude! You paid $750 for a vacuum???

chrisfx811
Sep 28, 2002, 12:24 PM
i got a kirby.... not to mention my girl almost never gives head

Chisholm
Sep 28, 2002, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by chrisfx811
i got a kirby.... not to mention my girl almost never gives head

:rolleyes:

I would have purchased a $50 vacuum and offer the girl the money for such "favors."

MacBandit
Sep 28, 2002, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by chrisfx811
i got a kirby.... not to mention my girl almost never gives head


That's funny ***** LMAOROTF:D :D

job
Sep 28, 2002, 08:04 PM
Damn this really went off-topic... :eek:

{1984}
Sep 29, 2002, 12:25 AM
FAR off track...

dantec
Sep 29, 2002, 12:32 AM
Do you think, my friends PS2 maybe fried itself, cause he has one of those huge, Philipps plasma tv's ? I have no knowledge of how tv's work, so does anyone know if they can change resolution, between what content (sat, cable, vcr, dvd & PS2) ?

dantec
Sep 29, 2002, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by hitman
This is very off-topic, but dantec, I saw you are in need of a 'tar.

Will this do? :)

Hey thanks a lot !

Chisholm
Sep 29, 2002, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by hitman
Damn this really went off-topic... :eek:

Sorry about that. I'll start a new thread on vacuum cleaners. iVac might be a good name.;)

madamimadam
Sep 29, 2002, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by AmigaMac
The Xbox was dead on arrival anyways... it will live the same ultimate demise as the NEC TurboGrafix 16, the Panasonic 3DO, the Atari Jaguar and the Sega Dreamcast!

1stly, how was Xbox dead on arrival... ****LOADS have been sold, esp. since M$ is trying their hardest to buy all the greatest games and game makers.

2ndly, there is no way in the world that you can put the DreamCast in the same sentance as the TurboGrafix 16 and 3DO.

The DreamCast was a HUGE machine but its primary market was Japan do to the very arcade nature of Sega. Sega has always made consoles for real gamers where as, to use the age old competition, Nintendo was more for those who actually thought graphics were important. I think the latter of that sentance also goes for M$... they have the people that look at a screen and say "how pretty".

madamimadam
Sep 29, 2002, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by Stillman
Firstly Nintendo is nothing like Sega. As a business, Nintendo has always outperformed Sega even in the 16-bits days, even when Sega outsold them they made more profit. For three years now, Nintendo has topped Nikkei as the best performing company. Sega had two consecutive failures - Saturn and Dreamcast, they are forced to exit the hardware market. Nintendo, on the otherhand, makes more profit from games than even Sony, Microsoft and EA. I do not see any reason that would push Nintendo to change their current business model.


I really don't think too many people actually know much about the way Sega worked and their sector of the market.

Neither the Saturn nor the DreamCast were failures as consoles only, IMO, failures from a marketing perspective.

If you analyse the situation, Ninteno more understood how to make money where as Sega has ALWAYS known how to be the best and push forward technology.

While Nintendo people where still playing Mario on their 16-bit SNES, Sega people were playing games like Doom in 32-bit via the 32-bit adaptor. Then the Sega people got stuck into CDs on their MegaCD or MegaDrive2/MegaCD2 pack. Then, still while Nintendo people where on their SNES, Sega people were playing Saturn. It was only after this time that the Nintendo 64 vs. Sega Saturn vs. Sony Playstation competition emerged. I would also like to point out that the Playstation 1 is still only a 32-bit console which set them pretty far back as a cutting edge machine. Saying this, before the PS1 really got big, the fact that Sony was using a lot of old technology would have paid for their heavy marketing campaign.

Now, from the business/marketing point of view of Sega, I think the 32-bit adaptor and the Saturn were 2 machines they should have left out. This would have given far more resources for developing a better DreamCast, which they would have had on the maket earlier, setting it up as the only competition in their range for the Nintendo 64 and creating a bigger demand like the Nintendo 64 had over the SNES.

Marketing really can make or break a product/company and I think Sega really needed their own Steve Jobs to keep them in the console arena.

I just wish I could buy Crazy Taxi 3 for my DreamCast
:(

gilligan
Sep 29, 2002, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet


considering that the 'mods' are just for using illeagally copied games, I can't see this being all that surprising. And I'm sure its just a matter of time before someone comes out with something that bypasses these fixes....

D



I have an xbox, and I really love it. I wish I had a mod chip because I can't play burned DVDs or burned CDs. They're not illegal...

So you guys know (and I'll repeat this later in the posts), I don't have any complaints about my xbox. Actually, for the price, it's a lot better than any computer you could buy. (for games, of course)

gilligan
Sep 29, 2002, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Soma_Addict
i find it extremely comical whenever an Xboxer defends their system of choice with only one game. two if you count the sequel. it is like saying that a band is very good although they are only a one hit wonder. a one hit wonder that bought another band so that they could have exclusive rights.

paying a ton of money for other peoples creative efforts does not sound like a solid business practice to me.

get a life. stop making fun of other people because they like certain things that you arbitrarily don't like. I actually don't like halo very much, and I still love my xbox. I don't need to defend it with anything... it's just an opinion.

So you disapprove of microsoft buying people to make their games. wooo. at least they're trying to do SOMETHING... it would be soooo boring if there were only 2 popular video game systems out there.

consider this: how many xboxes do you think have sold in the last year?

now consider this: how many macintosh computers have sold in the last year?

yikes... ... look everybody it's "dead on arrival".

ha!

gilligan
Sep 29, 2002, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by BongHits
you'd be hard pressed to find a better (more profitable) business model than MS...the only company making more money is the Saudi Arabian Princes oil company, and that's just because the US (wealthiest nation) is nearly 100% dependant on oil from this region (i realize their is oil in alaska and venezuela, but not nearly as much.)


What? Take an economics course before you start spilling your assumptions all over the board!

there are at least hundreds of other buisnesses making as much, if not more money than microsoft.

Hey... did you know that almost ALL of the oil harvested in Alaska the US is NOT USED BY THE US?

Ha... who would have guessed?

And we really aren't 100 percent dependent on oil... we just choose to use the stuff because it's easier than making adjustments to other fuels. Just wait... when we run out of oil it'll only be a year or two before we've made a 90% recovery on other fuels.

Did you know that you can make deisel out of waste plastic? You can. Did you know that you can make deisel out of soybeans? You can. Did you know that many cars could be re-jetted to run on ethanol, which comes from corn? they can.

gilligan
Sep 29, 2002, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by AssassinOfGates
In case you havent heard, Halo is comming to mac, so its worth the wait, especially since Bungie originated on Mac. Shame M$ bought it. And shame that M$ bought RAREware. Damn now GC wont get Perfect Dark 2 or any other RARE games after starfox and donkeykong. Instead, they will be brought to Xbox, just like DOA3 and halo was. Im seeing another anti-competetion trend here, and I hope the DOJ can get up off their corrupt asses and actually prevent yet another monopoly in the making.

Oh.. gee... you must be right. I mean... hell... it'll really be worth waiting another 6 months to play a game that I could be playing right now on a console that costs 400 bucks rather than a computer that costs (at least) 1600. Way to go, short bus.

madamimadam
Sep 30, 2002, 12:00 AM
Originally posted by gilligan


Oh.. gee... you must be right. I mean... hell... it'll really be worth waiting another 6 months to play a game that I could be playing right now on a console that costs 400 bucks rather than a computer that costs (at least) 1600. Way to go, short bus.

Interesting, your location suggests you are in the US but your pricing says Australia.

Xbox is about $200 in the US and $400 in Australia (exchange = $US0.55 to $AU1)

iMacs start at $799 in the US and $1795 in Australia.

Chryx
Sep 30, 2002, 04:32 AM
Originally posted by dukestreet


considering that the 'mods' are just for using illeagally copied games, I can't see this being all that surprising. And I'm sure its just a matter of time before someone comes out with something that bypasses these fixes....

D

Um, not quite...
A lot of people want to turn them into routers (http://xbox-linux.sourceforge.net/) :)

MacBandit
Sep 30, 2002, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by BongHits
you'd be hard pressed to find a better (more profitable) business model than MS...the only company making more money is the Saudi Arabian Princes oil company, and that's just because the US (wealthiest nation) is nearly 100% dependant on oil from this region (i realize their is oil in alaska and venezuela, but not nearly as much.)

How is losing money on the sale of every XBox considered profitable???

allpar
Sep 30, 2002, 02:29 PM
XBox is still in the "grow it until everything else dies" stage. There was a time when MS put real effort into making Office as good as it could be. Mac Word 5.1 was an example of that. Word for Windows 1.0 was, too. And Excel - any version. And PowerPoint. (Never MS Graph!). Then, once they had total market share, they could rely on throwing in tons of useless junk and VisualBasic, the latter so they could have a true monopoly - because a plain Word file is relatively easy to translate, but one with macros is durn near impossible to reproduce on open-source.

Anyhoo... here's some facts.

eweek wrote: "Microsoft plans to spend more than $3 billion over the next
three years on its Office productivity suite and aims to double annual revenue from Office to $20 billion by 2010."

So they make $10 billion per year now, and hey! They're going to INCREASE their investment to $1 billion per year for three years.

So their net profit, assuming no marketing or admin costs (etc.) ... $9 billion per year. Under the INCREASED expense model. I'd be generous and say they spend half of that for marketing, shipping, overhead, etc.

$4.5 billion net revenue per year from one product.

Not bad!

bunge
Oct 11, 2002, 10:33 PM
To those of you that were suggesting that the PS2 was already maxed out, there's an interview with a Capcom programmer about Devil May Cry 2 over at Gamespy. Earlier in the thread Devil May Cry was used as an example of some of the best visuals on the PS2, but in the interview the interviewee claims they've doubled the resolution in the sequel.

It's probably safe to assume that the PS2 is still progressing very nicely.

bunton
Oct 12, 2002, 01:06 PM
NINTENDO HAS ALWAYS REIGHNED SUPREME

NINTENDO the original was the best of its time

Super Nintendo was not a great improvement but was still beter than Sega

Nintendo 64 kicked ass even better than PS one

Now the cube is here and is way better than X-Box

diorio
Oct 12, 2002, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by bunton
NINTENDO HAS ALWAYS REIGHNED SUPREME

NINTENDO the original was the best of its time

Super Nintendo was not a great improvement but was still beter than Sega

Nintendo 64 kicked ass even better than PS one

Now the cube is here and is way better than X-Box

I personally like the super nintendo more tha you give it credit for, and I liked the PS one better than N64, but thats just my opinion.
And by the way chrisfx811, thats what your five fingered lover is for.
:rolleyes:

madamimadam
Oct 12, 2002, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by bunton
NINTENDO HAS ALWAYS REIGHNED SUPREME

NINTENDO the original was the best of its time

Super Nintendo was not a great improvement but was still beter than Sega

Nintendo 64 kicked ass even better than PS one

Now the cube is here and is way better than X-Box

HHhhmmm..... I thought this was a constuctive thread but if this is what it has come to:

SEGA ALWAYS REIGHNED SUPREME

SEGA MASTER SYSTEM 2 the original was the best of its time

MEGA DRIVE was a great improvement and was still beter than Nintendo

Nintendo 64 sucked ass even more than PS one

Now the cube is here and it is still as lagging on technology as all previous releases.

bunton
Oct 13, 2002, 12:01 PM
Yeah I was ranking them as overall better system and company

Not what is faster or what had this game or how much bits or technology just when they arrived and what peopple liked.

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 05:05 PM
Now the cube is here and it is still as lagging on technology as all previous releases. [/QUOTE]

How do you figure that the Gamecube is lagging on technology?

because it doesn't have pixel shaders or dolby 5.1 output.. puh-leeze.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by Chryx

Now the cube is here and it is still as lagging on technology as all previous releases.

How do you figure that the Gamecube is lagging on technology?

because it doesn't have pixel shaders or dolby 5.1 output.. puh-leeze. [/QUOTE]

Nintendo have always been last to bring out their console and they have regularly been behind the competition with technology. The only way that I see a difference to this is that, in the Sega vs. Nintendo days, Nintendo always had better graphics, most likely due to the amount of extra time it took them to release, but then Sega would make another release quickly that shot them back down again.

Now that we have more companies in the market, Nintendo has all but become a kids toy and just does not stand up technologically to its competition.

It is so sad to think about the fact that it has taken them this long to ditch the cartridge and that the GameBoy only went colour in its more recent life.

Back to the Game Cube, I really don't believe that it addresses the full potential market out there and, come one, it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there. Maybe I can start a company and sell custom configured gaming Macs.... I could make a fortune if I made lots of childrens games as well.

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 06:58 PM
it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there.

You're kidding me, right?

a 485Mhz G3 + SIMD with a VERY low latency memory subsystem or a 733Mhz Celeron...

I'll take the G3 thankyouverymuch.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there.

You're kidding me, right?

a 485Mhz G3 + SIMD with a VERY low latency memory subsystem or a 733Mhz Celeron...

I'll take the G3 thankyouverymuch.

Like I said, and I'll start up a company dedicated to making Mac gaming machines that will kick the competitions arse.... I am certain to make a fortune.
</sarcasm>

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 07:08 PM
Like I said, and I'll start up a company dedicated to making Mac gaming machines that will kick the competitions arse.... I am certain to make a fortune.
</sarcasm>

So you think that the Gamecube is a Mac because they share processor family?..

Are you aware how ignorant that sounds?

I suppose you think the Megadrive was a Mac because it used a Motorola 68000... ?

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
Like I said, and I'll start up a company dedicated to making Mac gaming machines that will kick the competitions arse.... I am certain to make a fortune.
</sarcasm>

So you think that the Gamecube is a Mac because they share processor family?..

Are you aware how ignorant that sounds?

I suppose you think the Megadrive was a Mac because it used a Motorola 68000... ?

Dude, why not think before you talk.

I made a comparison to prove a point.

Ask yourself the question, if a non-biased gamer could have any games in the world and any personal computer system in the world, why would they not even think of buying a Mac?

The MegaDrive is the same deal, I LOVE my MegaDrive but do I think it is any good at graphics... **** no! The difference, though, is that Sega had the game base to pull it off and, by that, I mean the games that were on Sega that were not on Nintento were of such a caliber that it made it the obvious purchase to me.

These days, though, there seems to be a move away from games being owned by one console. I think GameCube is one console that still defys that a lot but IMO what they have could not be missed on the other side of the fence. Saying this, the choice is becoming far less about which game you want and far more about what else the console has to offer and who markets to you the best.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 07:43 PM
Actually, one of the most intellegent things about the PS2, IMO, is the use of USB and Firewire... what better way to open up your console to 3rd party extras. While Sony might not directly benifit from 3rd parties, knowing that there are lots of extras out there increases consumer desire for the product and to buy future products (exp. if their PS2 extras work with the "PS3").

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 07:47 PM
Dude, why not think before you talk.

Right back at you.

I made a comparison to prove a point.

Making a comparison that could be interpreted multiple ways without indicating which way you want it to be interpreted?...

mmkay.

But wait, I responded to the point of "it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there."

That's nothing to do with the backpedalling you're doing below, that's knocking it (unfairly) from a technical standpoint...

Ask yourself the question, if a non-biased gamer could have any games in the world and any personal computer system in the world, why would they not even think of buying a Mac?

That's simple, quantity of games and the fact that a Mac (or a PC) costs a shedload more than a console.
nothing whatsoever to do with the technical side of things.

These days, though, there seems to be a move away from games being owned by one console.

true, to an extent, but I'm not seeing GTA3 for the Gamecube, I'm not seeing Halo for the PS2, I'm not seening Rogue Leader for the XBox.

I think GameCube is one console that still defys that a lot but IMO what they have could not be missed on the other side of the fence. Saying this, the choice is becoming far less about which game you want and far more about what else the console has to offer and who markets to you the best.

It's about who markets to you the best?...

I agree that things like doubling as a DVD player are useful, but the primary selling point for a console SHOULD be the quantity of FUN games for it, NOT the technical specs of the console, not the halfassed 'extras' the console can do.

Anyone that buys a console because they saw an advert that said it was mega-awesome-cool deserves whatever the hell they get.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
But wait, I responded to the point of "it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there."

That's nothing to do with the backpedalling you're doing below, that's knocking it (unfairly) from a technical standpoint...


What is unfair about it and, also, I am using multiple points for my claim, or I would not have a substancial arguement, but since you made a comment about my tech argements there was no reason for me to continue my other points?

Ask yourself the question, if a non-biased gamer could have any games in the world and any personal computer system in the world, why would they not even think of buying a Mac?

That's simple, quantity of games and the fact that a Mac (or a PC) costs a shedload more than a console.
nothing whatsoever to do with the technical side of things.


I admit I could have worded it better but you also did not read what I had said. What does "a Mac (or a PC) costs a shedload more than a console" have to do with "any personal computer system"????

Also, to the part I could have worded better, you said "quantity of games" and I was trying to get to the point that this person could play any game on any personal computer. I dare say that, if there was no difference in software between Mac and PC, an unbiased gamer would still choose PC and a heavy reason for that is that the PowerPC is not exactly the greatest 3D processor. Sure, that would not be the only reason but all us know, though some deny, that if the PC and Mac were the same cost people would choose the PC for gaming and the Pentium/Celerons ability to handle games is superiour.

Machines/processors need to be purchased according to what you do with them. No processor is best at everything.

These days, though, there seems to be a move away from games being owned by one console.

true, to an extent, but I'm not seeing GTA3 for the Gamecube, I'm not seeing Halo for the PS2, I'm not seening Rogue Leader for the XBox.

Well, if you did, there would not be a MOVE away, all games would be on all consoles. :rolleyes:

I agree that things like doubling as a DVD player are useful, but the primary selling point for a console SHOULD be the quantity of FUN games for it, NOT the technical specs of the console, not the halfassed 'extras' the console can do.

Anyone that buys a console because they saw an advert that said it was mega-awesome-cool deserves whatever the hell they get.

Time for a reality check.... the games market has moved to a new era. It is an era that I do not like but what can I do about it. I still own old consoles because the quality of games was far greater back then. These days, boxes are sold by how good the graphics are except in a couple of rare cases. Obviously there will always be a market for worthwhile games since people such as myself are still desiring something that changes my minds ability to think instead of its ability to keep up with what is going on.

Also, most people are not technologically minded like may of us... the TV says a box is cool and they buy that one... they do not know any better.... they just wanted something to play games on. I really do think that the day of people choosing a console according to the games on it is over and for Nintendo to say in the market in the long term they are going to keep pushing the GameCube, and future consoles, hard, if not harder.

I could not give a **** how graphical a console is, I want good games but this debate is about how it is not how it should be.

bunge
Oct 13, 2002, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by Chryx

I agree that things like doubling as a DVD player are useful, but the primary selling point for a console SHOULD be the quantity of FUN games for it, NOT the technical specs of the console, not the halfassed 'extras' the console can do.

I think this is primarily why the PS2 is leading the industry. They have the quantity of games plus equal their competition in terms of the 'extras' offered.

The Xbox has an uphill battle, but I believe (unfortunately) Microsoft is in the industry for the long haul. The Xbox may fail, but Xbox2 will succeed through attrition. Sega has already fallen by the wayside, and it looks like Nintendo might be next. I would rather have Sony, Nintendo & Sega battling it out without Microsoft involved.

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 08:27 PM
What is unfair about it

You aren't giving the Gekko due credit.

unbiased gamer would still choose PC and a heavy reason for that is that the PowerPC is not exactly the greatest 3D processor. Sure, that would not be the only reason but all us know, though some deny, that if the PC and Mac were the same cost people would choose the PC for gaming and the Pentium/Celerons ability to handle games is superiour.

TBH I think that you're displaying a LOT of bias in that,

Point 1) a 2.8Ghz P4 might be better for games than a 1.25Ghz G4, that does NOT mean that a 733Mhz Celeron is better for the task than a 485Mhz Gekko/G3. (btw, the Gekko is faster per clock than the G4, since it's based on the original 4-stage G3/4 pipeline, not the stretched 7-stage pipeline the >500Mhz G4's use)

Point 2) One of the fastest processors available ANYWHERE right now is a PowerPC processor, especially for floating point maths.

Point 3) the reason people would choose a PC over a Mac for gaming is the quantity of games, NOT the ability of the hardware to cope with games.

Machines/processors need to be purchased according to what you do with them. No processor is best at everything.

No, but you're not giving the G3 in the Gamecube due credit, it's easily a match for the Celeron in the Xbox, especially when you take into account it's nifty memory subsystem.

the Xbox has more graphical grunt (and sound for that matter), but that's down to the Nvidia hardware, not the cpu.

I could not give a **** how graphical a console is, I want good games but this debate is about how it is not how it should be.

Okay, I see your stance there, you're basically saying that the Gamecube is suffering from the Mhz Myth? :)

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 08:27 PM
How is the Playstation 2 the first truely 128-bit processing console??

What makes it 128-bit and how is it different from those old consoles talked about earlier in this thread that where, I think, 4 x 32-bit???

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 08:30 PM
How is the Playstation 2 the first truely 128-bit processing console??

What makes it 128-bit and how is it different from those old consoles talked about earlier in this thread that where, I think, 4 x 32-bit???

I'd have to google up on this to be sure, but I'm moderately certain that the Playstation 2 isn't 128bit, it has a vector coprocessor as part of the emotion engine that works on data in 128bit chunks. (a la Altivec)


otherwise known as.. Marketing!

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
Point 3) the reason people would choose a PC over a Mac for gaming is the quantity of games, NOT the ability of the hardware to cope with games.


For the 3rd time, the example given said that you could get the same games for Mac and PC.

Machines/processors need to be purchased according to what you do with them. No processor is best at everything.

No, but you're not giving the G3 in the Gamecube due credit, it's easily a match for the Celeron in the Xbox, especially when you take into account it's nifty memory subsystem.

the Xbox has more graphical grunt (and sound for that matter), but that's down to the Nvidia hardware, not the cpu.

Well, now were are becoming speculative but the end result is that the XBox kicks the Cubes arse graphically and you pointed out also in audio.

I could not give a **** how graphical a console is, I want good games but this debate is about how it is not how it should be.

Okay, I see your stance there, you're basically saying that the Gamecube is suffering from the Mhz Myth? :) [/B]

Umm... not really no. I do not think the MHz Myth really exists in the console world because most people do not even know what processor is in their console. I think it is suffering under the hands of marketers, though. Microsoft and Sony have a LOT more marketing $ and it has a big impact.

It is also suffering from the "this one has better graphics so it is better" problem. People are buying for how it looks on screen instead of how it plays. The same used to be true, to an extent, for Nintendo vs. Sega with Nintendo winning that one.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
How is the Playstation 2 the first truely 128-bit processing console??

What makes it 128-bit and how is it different from those old consoles talked about earlier in this thread that where, I think, 4 x 32-bit???

I'd have to google up on this to be sure, but I'm moderately certain that the Playstation 2 isn't 128bit, it has a vector coprocessor as part of the emotion engine that works on data in 128bit chunks. (a la Altivec)


otherwise known as.. Marketing!

AAAHHH... I had a suspicion things might have worked that way. They really need governing laws about how companies describe their processors.

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 08:45 PM
For the 3rd time, the example given said that you could get the same games for Mac and PC.

given the same games, then I'd go with the Mac. (but that 's just me)

Well, now were are becoming speculative but the end result is that the XBox kicks the Cubes arse graphically and you pointed out also in audio.

how is that speculative?, the G3 is faster per clock than the P3/Celeron, and it's tied to a very low latency memory subsystem.

And your "it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there." statement is still wrong :)

Umm... not really no. I do not think the MHz Myth really exists in the console world because most people do not even know what processor is in their console.

When the Xbox was introduced there were 'checkbox' specification lists printed on the Microsoft blurb for it, comparing it with the GC and PS2 on processor clock/memory quantity etc etc.


the gamecube does have ONE clear advantage however, it's cheaper than the PS2 or Xbox (here in England at least)

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
For the 3rd time, the example given said that you could get the same games for Mac and PC.

given the same games, then I'd go with the Mac. (but that 's just me)

If you were a gamer... why on earth would you do that.

Well, now were are becoming speculative but the end result is that the XBox kicks the Cubes arse graphically and you pointed out also in audio.

how is that speculative?, the G3 is faster per clock than the P3/Celeron, and it's tied to a very low latency memory subsystem.

And your "it uses a PowerPC processor to handle 3D gaming.... you are just asking not to be number 1 there." statement is still wrong :)

It is speculative because you need real world examples. As a Mac user I would have thought you would understand well that you regularly need to forget about the specs and test how it works in the real world. If my statement if wrong, though, you are saying that the PowerPC is number 1 for 3D graphics... give me a break.

Umm... not really no. I do not think the MHz Myth really exists in the console world because most people do not even know what processor is in their console.

When the Xbox was introduced there were 'checkbox' specification lists printed on the Microsoft blurb for it, comparing it with the GC and PS2 on processor clock/memory quantity etc etc.

I missed the point.... so what if it was on a blurb... that does not mean most people know the processor in their machines. I think you keep forgetting that most people are not technologically minded and MHz = zip and processor = zip, clock is something on the wall to tell the time and memory is an intangable item in your mind.

bunge
Oct 13, 2002, 09:16 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
How is the Playstation 2 the first truely 128-bit processing console??

What makes it 128-bit and how is it different from those old consoles talked about earlier in this thread that where, I think, 4 x 32-bit???

I'd have to google up on this to be sure, but I'm moderately certain that the Playstation 2 isn't 128bit, it has a vector coprocessor as part of the emotion engine that works on data in 128bit chunks. (a la Altivec)

Ars has a nice article about the chip itself here (http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/playstation2/ee-1.html) that has a few good explanations. One quote is this:

"Finally, the Emotion Engine contains a 10-channel DMA controller (DMAC) to manage up to 10 simultaneous transfers on the Emotion Engine's internal 128-bit, 64-bit, and 16-bit buses."

and this:

"The two, fully-pipelined 64b integer ALU's are interesting, because they can either be used independently of each other (like in a normal CPU), or they can be locked together to do 128-bit integer SIMD in the following configurations: sixteen, 8-bit ops/cycle; eight, 16-bit ops/cycle; four, 32-bit ops/cycle. Pretty sweet.

To take advantage of the integer and FP SIMD capabilities that COP2 (COP2 = VU0) and the iALUs provide, Toshiba used extensions to the MIPS III ISA that include a comprehensive set of 128-bit SIMD instructions."

So it has full 128-bit busses and instructions (although they are channeled to outside chips as far as I can understand.)

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by bunge


Ars has a nice article about the chip itself here (http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/playstation2/ee-1.html) that has a few good explanations. One quote is this:

"Finally, the Emotion Engine contains a 10-channel DMA controller (DMAC) to manage up to 10 simultaneous transfers on the Emotion Engine's internal 128-bit, 64-bit, and 16-bit buses."

and this:

"The two, fully-pipelined 64b integer ALU's are interesting, because they can either be used independently of each other (like in a normal CPU), or they can be locked together to do 128-bit integer SIMD in the following configurations: sixteen, 8-bit ops/cycle; eight, 16-bit ops/cycle; four, 32-bit ops/cycle. Pretty sweet.

To take advantage of the integer and FP SIMD capabilities that COP2 (COP2 = VU0) and the iALUs provide, Toshiba used extensions to the MIPS III ISA that include a comprehensive set of 128-bit SIMD instructions."

So it has full 128-bit busses and instructions (although they are channeled to outside chips as far as I can understand.)

Wanna know why the PS2 is so good:
A MAC is used in a variety of vector calculations, the most common of these being the dot product. ;) ;) ;)

Thanks for the link

Chryx
Oct 13, 2002, 09:35 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by madamimadam

If you were a gamer... why on earth would you do that.

Same games + OS that doesn't make me tear my hair out.

It wouldn't be a G3/4 based Mac though, I'm using x86 hardware right now and I'm not switching until the GPUL hits. (or whatever comes instead of that if by some freak chance Apple don't use it)

you are saying that the PowerPC is number 1 for 3D graphics... give me a break.

I didn't say that, I said that _a_ specific PowerPC chip is better than _a_ specific x86 chip. (a POWER4 does make anything x86 cry though, and that's just a hulking brute of a PowerPC processor.)

and here's a hint, 3d graphics are generally video hardware bound WELL before the processor runs out of steam.

I missed the point.... so what if it was on a blurb... that does not mean most people know the processor in their machines.

No, but they look at the blurb sheet and it has Microsoft claiming that it has a processor much faster than the nearest competiton because it's clocked at 733Mhz.. and they don't know enough to disbelieve that.

The same reason some people would take a 2Ghz P4 over an AthlonXP @ 1.73Ghz, the "It has a bigger number so it must be better" mentality.

madamimadam
Oct 13, 2002, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by Chryx

If you were a gamer... why on earth would you do that.

Same games + OS that doesn't make me tear my hair out.

It wouldn't be a G3/4 based Mac though, I'm using x86 hardware right now and I'm not switching until the GPUL hits. (or whatever comes instead of that if by some freak chance Apple don't use it)

Time for another reality check, I think. I would choose a mac but it would not be a G3/4 based system it would be a G500/501 when it comes out. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

No, but they look at the blurb sheet and it has Microsoft claiming that it has a processor much faster than the nearest competiton because it's clocked at 733Mhz.. and they don't know enough to disbelieve that.

The same reason some people would take a 2Ghz P4 over an AthlonXP @ 1.73Ghz, the "It has a bigger number so it must be better" mentality.

Firstly.... who reads the blurb???

Secondly.... it is more about the name than the speed. People do not even think about AMD because it is not called Intel. Looking at Mac vs. PC is different because people know the name Apple and look at the specs.

Thirdly, you can talk about how great you think the Gecko is until you are blue in the face but it does not make the GameCube seem any better because it just does not stand up in real world tests.

Also, I will bring back an earlier point that you passed by in that the Nintendo is so heavily pushed towards children. Why would you want to play kiddies games when you could play big kids games?

At least the GameCube is like the DreamCast in that it's a size that reflects its use unlike the XBox that is big enough to hold the hardware to run eBay.