PDA

View Full Version : Played a X360 at GameStop...


katchow
Nov 1, 2005, 02:09 PM
gotta say i was a little underwhelmed. The controller felt nice, but the graphics boost was marginal. Does anyone have higher expectations for the next gen?

dubbz
Nov 1, 2005, 02:12 PM
I don't have high expectations for the first gen games. Will take a while before they get to really know the box.

runninmac
Nov 1, 2005, 02:16 PM
I played one at :eek: Walmart:eek: (im embaresed that i steped into that place) My experiance wasn't great. First they had these 5 yearold kids playing it having no clue what they were doing. Then I was underwhlemed at the graphics. And it was trashy Walmart. Im still wondering if I am going to get it on launch. I played CoD2 it was ok. I think if I do I will either get Perfect Dark Zero or Project Gotham Racing.

XNine
Nov 1, 2005, 02:19 PM
I don't have high expectations for the first gen games. Will take a while before they get to really know the box.

Agreed. I'm waiting to see if Best Buy here will have a midnight sale or if they'll just sell that morning. Either way, I have the morning off work to be there! :D

grapes911
Nov 1, 2005, 02:32 PM
I've read a lot of reviews of it not being what people expected. It seems that MS's goal it to release the 360 as many months before PS3 as possible. They should reevaluate that and work on making it right.

jared_kipe
Nov 1, 2005, 02:47 PM
Mmmm, were you guys playing/watching on a HD tv?

PixelFactory
Nov 1, 2005, 03:04 PM
Here is a look at how Madden looked on the Playstation, then the first Madden on the PS2, the latest Madden on the PS2 and finally on the xbox360. The 360 will be a good machine, it will just take time for delevopers to push the platform.

dubbz
Nov 1, 2005, 03:08 PM
Here is a look at how Madden looked on the Playstation, then the first Madden on the PS2, the latest Madden on the PS2 and finally on the xbox360. The 360 will be a good machine, it will just take time for delevopers to push the platform.

Ouch. The PS1 version looks horrible! :p

Some fairly noticeable changes from version to version.

zelmo
Nov 1, 2005, 03:16 PM
Here is a look at how Madden looked on the Playstation, then the first Madden on the PS2, the latest Madden on the PS2 and finally on the xbox360. The 360 will be a good machine, it will just take time for delevopers to push the platform.

Agreed. I'm sure there will be a step forward between the latest current for XB, GC, and PS2, and the first wave of games for the new consoles. I'm just not convinced I'm willing to spend $700 to get a 360, along with the necessary cables, extra controller and a few games for what will be, in the short term at least, a modest graphical improvement. And then do it all again for the PS3 and Revolution. That's why, this time out, I think I'm going to sit tight and enjoy the latest games on the current gen instead of rushing out to buy the new consoles. Maybe wait until the prices come down a hair and the 2nd wave of games comes out.

At least, that's my plan until they are actually available.:rolleyes:

zelmo
Nov 1, 2005, 03:18 PM
Ouch. The PS1 version looks horrible! :p

Some fairly noticeable changes from version to version.

Wish he had included a screen grab of the last Madden for the SNES/Genesis era, just for comparison. Then you'd recall what a quantum leap we had when we got the PS1.:eek: :p

grapes911
Nov 1, 2005, 03:22 PM
Wish he had included a screen grab of the last Madden for the SNES/Genesis era, just for comparison. Then you'd recall what a quantum leap we had when we got the PS1.:eek: :p
How about from Madden 96?
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/games/coverg/91/667691.jpg

homerjward
Nov 1, 2005, 03:22 PM
Here is a look at how Madden looked on the Playstation, then the first Madden on the PS2, the latest Madden on the PS2 and finally on the xbox360. The 360 will be a good machine, it will just take time for delevopers to push the platform.
is it just me or have games never showed depth of field before? (very evident on the 360 screenshot)

PixelFactory
Nov 1, 2005, 03:23 PM
Wish he had included a screen grab of the last Madden for the SNES/Genesis era, just for comparison. Then you'd recall what a quantum leap we had when we got the PS1.:eek: :p

Here you go. Remember that the SNES used sprites and not 3D models.

dubbz
Nov 1, 2005, 03:24 PM
How about from Madden 96?

My eyes! The goggles! They do nothing! :p

2nyRiggz
Nov 1, 2005, 03:29 PM
i dont think the xbox360 will make the splash they wanted to like how the PS2 did when it came out. I dont think the xbox360 will hurt PS3 coming out so early in the game.....im waiting on the revolution but i know im going to get all the systems like i do every generation.

xbox will be good(hopefully)


Bless

jared_kipe
Nov 1, 2005, 03:31 PM
Of course its gonna take time to develop better games for the new consoles. These games were developed on G5s you know, they couldn't do a whole lot.

yg17
Nov 1, 2005, 03:40 PM
Here you go. Remember that the SNES used sprites and not 3D models.

And just think, 10 years ago that was considered good.

jeremy.king
Nov 1, 2005, 03:40 PM
Were any of the demos using an HD compatible display? I got to imagine that would improve the quality some...

jimsowden
Nov 1, 2005, 05:25 PM
I played it at Best Buy. It was the Call of Duty 2 demo, and it was on a samsung 23" LCD HD. Very, very nice to say the least.

GFLPraxis
Nov 1, 2005, 08:10 PM
Got to play it at Best Buy. My original impression at Wal-Mart was very bad; Call of Duty 2 would lock up (the defective Wal-Mart disks), King Kong would not run (unique to this machine), and I was stuck with Kameo. The controller was locked in place with no range of motion and the screen was up above me at a terrible angle that hurt my neck. Kameo was underwhelming.


At Best Buy on the other hand, I got to play King Kong, and WOW. It's more the game than the system, but still. They had a nice HDTV, wired controllers you could grip how you wanted, and surround sound speakers. It looked and sounded great- the T-Rex chase was terrifying. Very fun.

The graphics are still below promised, but then, when you think about it;

Kameo is a GameCube game ported to XBox to XBox 360.

Call of Duty 2 is a PC game ported to XBox 360.

King Kong is a multiplatform, current gen game.


Current gen games are ALL single-threaded.
PC games are all single- or dual-threaded (since many PC's support hyperthreading, but few have multiple processors).

I'm sure that in the port they would shove some stuff onto the extra processors (like in Mac ports often sound or other extras are shoved onto the second thread), but most of the work would be concentrated in a single thread unless re-written from scratch. So it would be safe to assume that Kameo, CoD2, and King Kong all use only some of the system's power.

I can't wait to see what a game designed ground up for next gen looks like.



Admittedly, it just felt like current gen games with a comfy controller and better visuals. I'm still not buying one; not if I have to spend $600 to actually play a game online.

themacman
Nov 1, 2005, 08:36 PM
the ps3 is going to be amazing. hands down.

alex_ant
Nov 1, 2005, 09:11 PM
Here you go. Remember that the SNES used sprites and not 3D models.
Why stop there?
This was pretty cutting-edge in 1986, although I remember that some football games then actually had color.

Counterfit
Nov 1, 2005, 09:47 PM
I played it today at Best Buy. I tried the CoD2 demo, which is really hard without a mouse. The sound was amazing though, even through the two tiny speakers on the Samsung LCD TV (dunno if it was HD, and was a bit on the small side).
I played King Kong too, but going against 2 T-Rexs is not a fair fight :mad:
However, I'm going to wait to try a Revolution, and for price drops before I start seriously looking at a system to buy.

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 01:06 AM
I know I'm quoting myself, but...

I'm still not buying one; not if I have to spend $600 to actually play a game online.

I'm curious if anyone else has done the math on this. What do you need to buy to have a basic online gaming experience on the XBox 360?

XBox 360 Premium: $399.

Why Premium?

If you buy the basic model, you still need to buy a $40 memory card to save your Live profile and a $20 headset required for online play. That's $360; but the memory card is too small for downloadable content, so you can't play on servers running the latest maps or updates, or MMO's at all. $40 more gets the premium with the hard drive, headset, remote control, wireless controllers, and HD output cables. It'd be stupid to go with the other model and you wouldn't get a full online gaming experience.

Wireless Adapter: $99

This ridiculously overpriced wireless adapter is a REQUIREMENT for me, where ethernet cords don't reach where I have my consoles.

Actual game (launch titles): $50-$60.

XBox Live: $50

Why $50? The monthly fee has gone up to $8 a month, however the yearly fee of $50 a year remains the same, therefore you save a LOT of money by getting the yearly subscription.

$600-$610, right there. You can reduce that to $560-$570 if you go with the Core, but then don't get the hard drive, downloadable content, or anything.

TheMonarch
Nov 2, 2005, 01:10 AM
I know I'm quoting myself, but...



I'm curious if anyone else has done the math on this. What do you need to buy to have a basic online gaming experience on the XBox 360?

XBox 360 Premium: $399.

Why Premium?

If you buy the basic model, you still need to buy a $40 memory card to save your Live profile and a $20 headset required for online play. That's $360; but the memory card is too small for downloadable content, so you can't play on servers running the latest maps or updates, or MMO's at all. $40 more gets the premium with the hard drive, headset, remote control, wireless controllers, and HD output cables. It'd be stupid to go with the other model and you wouldn't get a full online gaming experience.

Wireless Adapter: $99

This ridiculously overpriced wireless adapter is a REQUIREMENT for me, where ethernet cords don't reach where I have my consoles.

Actual game (launch titles): $50-$60.

XBox Live: $50

Why $50? The monthly fee has gone up to $8 a month, however the yearly fee of $50 a year remains the same, therefore you save a LOT of money by getting the yearly subscription.

$600-$610, right there. You can reduce that to $560-$570 if you go with the Core, but then don't get the hard drive, downloadable content, or anything.



You don't have to use their wireless adapter. I think I recall that it uses standard communication, and not a propriety one, so any wireless adapter should work (It also worked for Xbox 1).

As for game prices, they can shove it, they're getting too expensive. I know production costs have soared, but thats a problem THEY have to work with. I'm hoping Nintendo catches both sony and Microsoft with this one, It may play a big factor in this gen's console wars, who knows. Nintendo might gain something...

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 01:52 AM
You don't have to use their wireless adapter. I think I recall that it uses standard communication, and not a propriety one, so any wireless adapter should work (It also worked for Xbox 1).

As for game prices, they can shove it, they're getting too expensive. I know production costs have soared, but thats a problem THEY have to work with. I'm hoping Nintendo catches both sony and Microsoft with this one, It may play a big factor in this gen's console wars, who knows. Nintendo might gain something...

Are you sure on that? I know an ethernet-to-WiFi bridge would work, but those cost a lot more than a normal USB ethernet adapter. And in the Windows world, WiFi adapters ALWAYS require specific drivers, there is no "standard communications" with USB ones (though the ethernet-to-Wifi bridges will work fine, but again, they're more expensive, generally around $80-$100 or more).

TheMonarch
Nov 2, 2005, 01:59 AM
Are you sure on that? I know an ethernet-to-WiFi bridge would work, but those cost a lot more than a normal USB ethernet adapter. And in the Windows world, WiFi adapters ALWAYS require specific drivers, there is no "standard communications" with USB ones (though the ethernet-to-Wifi bridges will work fine, but again, they're more expensive, generally around $80-$100 or more).


Well I can't tell you that I'm absolutely sure, but yeah, I think Its possible to just buy 2 really cheap $30 wireless routers and bridge them for wifi xbox. If I recall, in the official xbox magazine, they said it could work "But don't come crying to us if you have any problems" (They also said that about not buying an official xbox crossover ethernet cable)...

iEdd
Nov 2, 2005, 02:46 AM
I can tell you I played online with my PS2 using airport express for wireless :)
(Signal from A-Extreme base station)

Dagless
Nov 2, 2005, 06:20 AM
I played my Xbox online by tunnelling wifi through my powerbook on its Wireless connection. That was fun for about 10 minutes. The Xbox just didn't have the online games for me. Halo 2 was it even though, to me, it was the single most fundamentally flawed game I've ever played. If only 1 was online.

From the screenshots I've seen I've been unimpressed by the Xbox 360. It isn't really offering anything more than a visual boost if you're not going to use Live. My powerbook plays all my videos and displays all my pictures, and my iPod and the line-in cable to my Amp takes care of the music.

nborders
Nov 2, 2005, 07:38 AM
Yea, you can never judge by the first gen of games.

Halo, was a fluke. No way the new Xbox can do that again.

~n

Ja Di ksw
Nov 2, 2005, 07:54 AM
My eyes! The goggles! They do nothing! :p

lmao!

Nice reference.

Dagless
Nov 2, 2005, 08:40 AM
Yea, you can never judge by the first gen of games.

Halo, was a fluke. No way the new Xbox can do that again.

~n

Yup, just like Rare will never do another 'Goldeneye'. Microsoft pumped all their money to Rare making Perfect Dark Zero. when its out I'm guessing it will be just like Halo 2. First days will get brilliant reviews then the honeymoon period will be over and it will just fall back to being yet another console FPS.

PharmD
Nov 2, 2005, 09:05 AM
Give me my Revolution! I've never been a fan of Xbox or the new 360. I think the PS3 will own it.

clearthinker
Nov 2, 2005, 10:21 AM
Just remember when the XBox came out that the graphics and all the ports where acceptable but nothing great. They have con't to push the graphics since.

The games will only get better as the developers learn the box.

Also, xbox live will be a huge improvement (per the company line) so that is where alot of the "improvement" is going to be.

I'm holding out until Spring '06 ....I think they will eventually add HD DVD or Blue Ray drives to the box and then it will be sweet.

2cents

polyethyleneguy
Nov 2, 2005, 10:25 AM
Hmmm....i seem to remember....

XNine
Nov 2, 2005, 11:12 AM
Hmmm....i seem to remember....

GAH! My father had that!!!!

Anyway, the Nintendo, just like the the N64, and Gamecube, after it, will fail. They never even got onlinme support for it. The PS 2 had excellent games, but their online support was horrid. Absolutely crap. Xbox had some medicore games for the most part, but Xbox Live was pretty damn good.

The PS 3 will beat both of them, I'm sure, I can't wiat for it, but there are some games I HAVE to have, like DOA 4, Halo 3 (more for the multiplayer than anything). I really don't like Nintendo and the direction they've taken.

Mavimao
Nov 2, 2005, 12:00 PM
Oh atari 2600....I love thee dearly....

http://www.atariage.com/2600/screenshots/s_Football_1.png

http://www.atariage.com/2600/screenshots/s_Football_2.png

GimmeSlack12
Nov 2, 2005, 12:15 PM
Can we get some screens of:
TECMO BOWL????? From the NES? Now that was a fun game.

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 12:16 PM
I can tell you I played online with my PS2 using airport express for wireless :)
(Signal from A-Extreme base station)

Right, but we're talking about the receiver, not the base station.

TECMO BOWL????? From the NES? Now that was a fun game.

WHOO!
http://www.sportplanet.com/tsb/TSBH.jpg

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 12:21 PM
GAH! My father had that!!!!

Anyway, the Nintendo, just like the the N64, and Gamecube, after it, will fail. They never even got onlinme support for it.

What kind of reasoning is that? How does it matter if the GameCube never got online support; their next system has built in WiFi, an XBox Live rivalling service, free online play, hundreds of downloadable games, DS connectivity, downloadable demos for both Revolution and DS, etc. They're making up for what they missed last gen big time.

And the GameCube didn't 'fail'; As I recall, Gamecube sold 16 million and XBox 17 million, and Nintendo had very high profit margins (every GameCube made a profit and most of the games sold were first party, vs XBox where every system made a gigantic loss and most games were third party) in comparison and made a LOT more money than Microsoft.

They didn't do good last time, therefore they will again? Dosen't seem very logical, sorry.

savar
Nov 2, 2005, 12:48 PM
I played one at :eek: Walmart:eek: (im embaresed that i steped into that place) My experiance wasn't great. First they had these 5 yearold kids playing it having no clue what they were doing. Then I was underwhlemed at the graphics. And it was trashy Walmart. Im still wondering if I am going to get it on launch. I played CoD2 it was ok. I think if I do I will either get Perfect Dark Zero or Project Gotham Racing.

Was it on an HDTV?

If not, my guess is that 360 is pretty bland unless you get an HDTV first. I certainly won't be paying $400 for a marginal upgrade in that case. I also want to know why HD is standard and SRS isn't. If you're going to push new tech, at least push them evenly.

Plus, the other comment about architecture: the new games all have to be multi-threaded in a way that developers have never done before. I do suspect that it will take some time to get things right. Hopefully by the time Halo 3 is done?

kuyu
Nov 2, 2005, 02:43 PM
I preordered the 360, and GFLPraxis is right... it cost about $700 for all the goodies. I bought the premium system, extra wireless controller, play and charge kit, year of Live, PDZ (wish I'd picked Kameo), and PGR3.

It's worth it to me, but I can see where that's waaay too much for a lot of people.

I'm also looking forward to the Rev and PS3. No telling which will "win" the console war. All will have their strengths and weaknesses, so it's really going to come down to personal preference.

But, if anyone thinks the PS3 bundle with all the goodies is going to be less than $700 they're totally crazy. I plan to set aside a cool grand for PS3 and all the extras (if I can get a job!). Hopefully it won't cost that much, but I'd rather be surprised by the price than dissapointed.

Dagless
Nov 2, 2005, 02:44 PM
I'm holding out until Spring '06 ....I think they will eventually add HD DVD or Blue Ray drives to the box and then it will be sweet...

I wouldn't count on that. some Xbox boss guy said that the 360 may get a HD-DVD upgrade later on, but not for gaming. He went on to say that it would also confuse people more so. I mean. Core, Premium, HD version. I can see what he's getting at.

Some analyst has come forward and predicted that the full Xbox 360 will cost half of what the PS3 will cost at launch in 2006. The ball is definitely in Microsofts court there, as much as I don't like them, I think they will be a very strong 'traditional' gaming machine competitor for the PS3.

Oh and although Praxis has said it; The rev and DS will/are making up for the lack of online on previous Nintendo machines. Even though they were sort of the first to have it with the satellite system on the Snes... but still. Mario Kart DS comes out this month. It has free online with a (IIRC) a matchmaking system, whole load of online capabilities and can be played through any wireless router, or buy Nintendo's WIFI dongle for £15-£20, not £100 :rolleyes:

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 05:39 PM
But, if anyone thinks the PS3 bundle with all the goodies is going to be less than $700 they're totally crazy. I plan to set aside a cool grand for PS3 and all the extras (if I can get a job!). Hopefully it won't cost that much, but I'd rather be surprised by the price than dissapointed.


Well, the handy part is that the PS3 has WiFi built in (so no $100 on a wireless adapter) and accepts standard SD and CF cards (which I already have, saving money on memory cards).

Sony hasn't announced that they're going to charge, so if we assume they do like this last generation and make it free, then $50 is saved from lack of online fees.

So unless the hard drive costs a fortune, or the PS3 costs $500 or something (my current guess is $400), OR Sony chooses to charge for online play, overall it'll be cheaper than the 360 after everything is included. If any of those things happen it could tip it over and make it cheaper to go with the 360.

GFLPraxis
Nov 2, 2005, 05:43 PM
I wouldn't count on that. some Xbox boss guy said that the 360 may get a HD-DVD upgrade later on, but not for gaming. He went on to say that it would also confuse people more so. I mean. Core, Premium, HD version. I can see what he's getting at.

Yeah, IIRC he basicly stated that they'll later add a new XBox 360 model with a HD-DVD drive for HD-DVD movie playback, but no games will ship on HD-DVD's because many will be out there that don't have the drive.


I heard an interesting point yesterday; Blu-ray is Sony's greatest strength and greatest weakness. I always thought, "Who cares who wins the next-gen movie format; the space is important for the games, I could care less which wins for movie format". But the point made was, if Blu-ray wins the format war, then with the support of the movie industry, Blu-ray production will step up and costs will drop dramatically and make the PS3 much cheaper, but with disks that hold a dozen times more than the XBox 360, giving Sony a huge advantage (much more extra content or higher quality stuff on their disks).

If Blu-ray loses the format war, with virtually no industry support, Blu-ray will remain expensive throughout the PS3's life cycle and cause the PS3 to have a very high price. This high price will probably kill it off for the consumers.

Mavimao
Nov 2, 2005, 06:03 PM
Good point about the Blu-Ray ideal, GFLPraxis. I personally feel that Blu-Ray will win and that perhaps the PS3 will have had something to do with that. If Microsoft had included an HD-DVD drive now, there might have been an extended fight between the two formats. But now that the HD-DVD guys keep dragging their feet in the mud (late release dates, late Xbox 360 support), I see Blu-Ray winning in a huge way.

My 2 cents.

kuyu
Nov 2, 2005, 09:35 PM
Lets assume for a second that the PS3 ships for $400 (which I doubt). Throw in an extra controller ($50), two games ($120), and a charger for the controllers ($30). We're up to $600, which is what I paid for my 360 bundle less shipping and taxes.

Sony has to not only put up the money for the new Cell chip and Blu-Ray drive in every PS3, but also build the facilities which can produce them. I wonder how many trillion yen that's going to cost? That means they have to make some (if not most) of that money back on the PS3. 360 is using standard tech that's been adapted for gaming. Much cheaper per unit, no new plants needed.

About wifi, you know that you don't have to buy the MS version, right? You can piggy back two wireless routers together and use the included ethernet cord. It requires a few minutes of setup on a computer though. But that shouldn't be a problem for someone who posts on a computer forum.;)

I've said it before and I'll say it again; PS3 is 10% more powerful, and 90% late to the game. :rolleyes:

Counterfit
Nov 3, 2005, 02:45 AM
Way back when Sega still made consoles, the Playstation was still being developed as a CD attachment for the SNES, and the X-Box was merely a rumor, I had a feeling that Sony and/or Microsoft would make a huge change in the game console industry, and not necessarily for the better. And here we have it. $700 to get started?! That's just ridiculous. What the hell happened to $200 getting you the system, a game, a controller, and for those who pre-ordered, a t-shirt and bag?
I think I'll wait for: A) the Revolution to be out and playable and 2) Price drops to where I can even remotely even think of asking someone to buy this as a present for me.

aswitcher
Nov 3, 2005, 02:55 AM
Was it on an HDTV?



Yeah, thats what I am thinking. You need to be playing this using the best connector to a screen that natively supports 720p without downscaling to 480 (typical of cheap plasmas).

They also need to damn well release a DVI and an HDMI connector soon...

Dagless
Nov 3, 2005, 07:24 AM
...costs will drop dramatically and make the PS3 much cheaper, but with disks that hold a dozen times more than the XBox 360, giving Sony a huge advantage (much more extra content or higher quality stuff on their disks).

If Blu-ray loses the format war, with virtually no industry support, Blu-ray will remain expensive throughout the PS3's life cycle and cause the PS3 to have a very high price. This high price will probably kill it off for the consumers.

I Have to whole heartedly disagree. Sony have a habit of charging more for games than the competition, well more than Nintendo at least. They say that carts cost more to produce than discs, that's a no brainer really. yet DS games in a high street shop cost £20-30 brand new whereas the same shop will have PSP games for £45, IIRC Manchester's Game stocks Tony Hawks PSP for £50.
Gamecube and DS, more so GBA all have cheaper games than the PS2 and PSP. PS2 surprising me the most because they use regular cheap DVD's that probably have a production cost of 3p or whatever.

Also, in the UK at least, the Playstation seems to be the scally console. at least it gets mentioned in the songs, and hey it just seems that way. to non-brits: a scally is someone who probably doesn't work or has a very low paid unskilled job, are either drunk or on drugs 24/7, live in a counsel estate with their pregnant 14 year old girlfriend etc... basically the bottom of the financial ladder. If the PS3 and its games are going to cost what they're saying it will then I fear for the 'low end' market that Sony have up until now ruled over.

Yvan256
Nov 3, 2005, 08:43 AM
How about from Madden 96?
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/games/coverg/91/667691.jpg

Oh yeah? How about NFL Football on Intellivision, circa 1979? :D

Butts M Biggilo
Nov 3, 2005, 09:16 AM
I loved Sub Battle. Any1 ever play it?
Butts

xli_ne
Nov 3, 2005, 09:18 AM
How about from Madden 96?
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/games/coverg/91/667691.jpg

still have madden 95 for my sega

Dagless
Nov 3, 2005, 09:56 AM
I dont understand all this taking the urine out of 2D sprites. I'd much rather play a 2D game than 3D anyday. but hey thats just me.

Sdashiki
Nov 3, 2005, 10:17 AM
Sounds like you need a modded xbox with 3000+ roms

SNES
NES
GBA
MAME
Genesis
N64
PSX
and of course XBOX

GFLPraxis
Nov 3, 2005, 11:16 AM
Which is of course illegal. :rolleyes:

GFLPraxis
Nov 3, 2005, 11:33 AM
I Have to whole heartedly disagree. Sony have a habit of charging more for games than the competition, well more than Nintendo at least.


Well, I'm not talking about game prices, I'm talking about the price of the actual console's Blu-ray drive.

If Sony gets enough industry support they'll eventually be able to reduce the cost of the Blu-ray DRIVE enough that the PS3 system doesn't cost much more than the XBox 360.

If they don't get industry support, then the Blu-ray drive itself will be the most expensive component in the PS3 and drive up the cost of the system enough that even several years into the next gen, the PS3 will still cost a lot more.


The cost of the disks isn't that important at the beginning; just like the first Playstation 2 games shipped on CD's because they didn't use a full DVD, I'd expect that the first-gen PS3 games will ship on DVD's rather than Blu-ray disks.

I do expect games to go to $60, at least for the ones on Blu-ray disks.


They say that carts cost more to produce than discs, that's a no brainer really. yet DS games in a high street shop cost £20-30 brand new whereas the same shop will have PSP games for £45, IIRC Manchester's Game stocks Tony Hawks PSP for £50.

Well, that's because the DS is one of the most easy-to-develop-for systems ever created. In fact, most people don't realize that DS stands for "Developer's System". IIRC some claim it's even easier than the GameBoy to develop for. Meanwhile, the PSP is a minitiarized, underclocked PS2 w/ WiFi. The Emotion Engine made the PS2 the hardest system to program for this last generation. Add to that the fact that games have to be close to PS2-quality, and you get that the development costs for a PSP games are much higher and developers have to find a way to make the money back. Thus, PSP games are more expensive because they take as much money to produce as a console game.

nimbus
Nov 3, 2005, 12:20 PM
DS means "Dual Screens".

But good info.

kuyu
Nov 3, 2005, 12:24 PM
DS means "Dual Screens".

But good info.

Actually it means both. Iwata has referred to the DS as the developer system and the dual screen. I think the DS was meant to get developers to start thinking outside the box about gaming in general.

Iwata is not happy with the current direction gaming is headed. He thinks we need a Revolution.:)

guifa
Nov 3, 2005, 01:03 PM
is it just me or have games never showed depth of field before? (very evident on the 360 screenshot)
Actually, yes, they have. The GameCube has used it on a large number of games, Mario Sunshine, Pikmin, StarFox Adventures, Geist, not sure if Metroid had DoF per se but it had a lot of other similar effects.

XNine
Nov 3, 2005, 01:13 PM
Depth of field has been around for a while now. Since PSX (original playstation).

I wish they'd make a 3rd person shooter or another 2d Metroid, or at least one with better controls (more FPS like). I sold my gamecube a few weeks after I got it and beat MGS TWIN SNAKES. Lame console. Didn't like any other games out for it...

Dagless
Nov 3, 2005, 01:21 PM
Actually, yes, they have. The GameCube has used it on a large number of games, Mario Sunshine, Pikmin, StarFox Adventures, Geist, not sure if Metroid had DoF per se but it had a lot of other similar effects.

Yup they did. Windwaker had it to a degree too. I dont think Metroid had it though; that game was just uber sharp in the graphics.

Dagless
Nov 3, 2005, 01:33 PM
I wish they'd make a 3rd person shooter or another 2d Metroid, or at least one with better controls (more FPS like). I sold my gamecube a few weeks after I got it and beat MGS TWIN SNAKES. Lame console. Didn't like any other games out for it...

there is a brand new 2D Metroid coming out on the DS :) Metroid Dread, apparently. I'm really glad Nintendo isn't forgetting the 2D just yet and hope they will always keep 2D games on their portables.

GFLPraxis
Nov 3, 2005, 07:07 PM
DS means "Dual Screens".

But good info.

At E3 2004, they called it "Developer System". Nintendo themselves have NEVER referred to it as Dual Screen. However, people assume it does and thus many websites advertise it as the "Nintendo Dual Screen". Nintendo themselves have never called it that, that I am aware of.

Stridder44
Nov 3, 2005, 09:39 PM
PS3 will own all

/Revolution is cool

clayj
Nov 3, 2005, 09:58 PM
Oh yeah? How about NFL Football on Intellivision, circa 1979? :DHow about THIS?:

http://www.thocp.net/software/games/consoles/mattel/pictures/mattel_football_large.jpg

PixelFactory
Nov 3, 2005, 10:07 PM
hey, I owned one of those. It was so cool when they made the head-to-head version.

Back to the topic on hand. I have a feeling Sony is going to start dropping features from the PS3 to get the price down. Only have Memory Stick Pro slots, make the hard drive an optional accessory as well as Wi-Fi and only have output for one monitor. Sony needs the PS3 to sell so they can have a blueray install base.

GFLPraxis
Nov 4, 2005, 12:06 AM
hey, I owned one of those. It was so cool when they made the head-to-head version.

Back to the topic on hand. I have a feeling Sony is going to start dropping features from the PS3 to get the price down. Only have Memory Stick Pro slots, make the hard drive an optional accessory as well as Wi-Fi and only have output for one monitor. Sony needs the PS3 to sell so they can have a blueray install base.

Hard drive already is an optional accessory, to allow users to choose the amount of space they get.

Counterfit
Nov 4, 2005, 12:37 AM
Which is of course illegal. :rolleyes:
Well, it's completely possible for some of the earliest video games to be out of copyright protection and in the public domain. Of course, that would require the creator to have died soon after making the game, and a 25 year wait after their death, which I think is current, but I'm not sure on. Of course, if the RIAA gets its way, it will be a 75 year (or more!) wait after the creator's death for something to be public domain. Pretty ****ing lame if you ask me.

GFLPraxis
Nov 4, 2005, 01:42 AM
Well, it's completely possible for some of the earliest video games to be out of copyright protection and in the public domain. Of course, that would require the creator to have died soon after making the game, and a 25 year wait after their death, which I think is current, but I'm not sure on. Of course, if the RIAA gets its way, it will be a 75 year (or more!) wait after the creator's death for something to be public domain. Pretty ****ing lame if you ask me.

Right, but the poster was talking about NES and SNES and N64 games, and the NES is only 20 years old. Maybe some pre-NES systems however can be played. And I believe there are all of three public domain ROMs out there. But nothing from Nintendo, Sega, or Sony is legally playable unless you rip it yourself. Which is incredibly difficult with cartridges.

GBA games are the only ones that can be ripped easily at low cost.

I agree, it's terribly lame, and the RIAA sucks.

GorillaPaws
Nov 4, 2005, 05:00 AM
I'm also going to wait for things to chill out before comitting to a system. None of the 360 launchtitles do much for me except for Oblivion, so I'm in no hurry to blow half a grand on a new system. My xbox is still chugging away and I just got Battlefront II so that should tide me over for a few months at least (long enought to read some reviews that will most likely confirm that I should wait a while longer). I'll say this much though, the xbox got me hooked on some great franchises like halo, forza, KOTOR (well bioware), Morrowind, Ninja Gaiden, Splinter Cell even Fable (with all it's shortcomings). Not that their all xbox exclusive, but they definetly had the better versions for Xbox.

One thing that I'm missing in my gaming life is RTS games which haven't really been done on the console. I'm hoping that they come up with some UI ideas to solve this (maybe a bluetooth/wifi console gaming mouse/keyboard?). I'd love to play some of the newest generation RTSes, but they are sadly not available for the Mac--not that my 800mhz G4 iMac would play it anyways.

As for the costs of games going up? Well I think it's reasonable, I mean games used to cost up or close to $50 in the NES era, so a 20% increase to cover the exponentially larger development costs seems like a minimal price increase these days. What frightens me more is the phenomina of developers taking less risks and watering down games to appeal to the broadest possible audience because the costs and thus the risk has increased so much over the past 5-8 years or so.

Alright, Rant over.

Dagless
Nov 4, 2005, 05:06 AM
PS3 will own all...


oooh I dont know about that, bad bad things are happening to the PS3. a list;

-3rd party developer support is dropping at speed. a lot of studios cannot afford the dev kit and the overall cost to develop a PS3 game, I cant remember the exact figure it was around £16m. costing similar to a film.
-No unified online service. Enough said, thats terrible. sunlight to the vampire.
-Blu-Ray is a gamble. If it doesn't pay off then expect expensive games, £60/$106 minimum to make up for dev cost too.
-The console itself is going to cost a lot. I forget the price thats being shouted around but with the tech the PS3 has it will cost a bomb.
-Difficulty of coding. Contributing to the lack of 3rd Party dev support. Gabe Newell commented on this, which is a shame because HL2 on next gen hardware would be amazing.
-The public is changing, online polls (though as pointless as they are) are showing lack of interest in PS3, and more in Xbox 360 and Rev. Sort of like the massive Sony lead is now jumping back and everything's levelling out.

I will definitely be getting a Rev, i still cant decide between an Xbox 360 or PS3. I'd like an extra console but the way things are going from bad to worse (well not really worse, more like not as they were intended to originally be). It seems that Sony and Microsoft are losing features (heh, sounds like Vista) whereas Nintendo are gaining them. it pays to keep quiet I suppose.

Palad1
Nov 4, 2005, 07:24 AM
In my time...
http://www.ioffer.com/img/1100592000/_i/4376146/1.jpg

xli_ne
Nov 4, 2005, 08:08 AM
went to walmart and they had a 360. but....



it was broke. DAMN

saunders45
Nov 4, 2005, 08:40 AM
Sony's take on everyone else.

**contains a few f-bombs***

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/index.php?t=archives&date=last

mac-er
Nov 4, 2005, 09:57 AM
went to walmart and they had a 360. but....



it was broke. DAMN

Figures.
I was at CompUSSR last night, and tried to play the 360. It tried to load all Call for Duty, and when the progress bar got full...the system totally locked up time after time.

srobert
Nov 4, 2005, 10:03 AM
there is a brand new 2D Metroid coming out on the DS :) Metroid Dread, apparently. I'm really glad Nintendo isn't forgetting the 2D just yet and hope they will always keep 2D games on their portables.

Unfortnatly, Dread has been canned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_Dread

Too bad. I really enjoyed Fusion and Zero Mission.

nimbus
Nov 4, 2005, 01:21 PM
-The public is changing, online polls (though as pointless as they are) are showing lack of interest in PS3, and more in Xbox 360 and Rev. Sort of like the massive Sony lead is now jumping back and everything's levelling out.

Yeah, the public really wants to play the piece of overpriced crap that is the Xbox 360. $600 to play online? No thank you. Honestly, it DOES NOT look next generation. The backgrounds are nice, but it just looks like a very well done Xbox game. But they still have time and room to grow.

Sony needs to keep everything in the system, and sell it at $399. Don't take all that cool stuff away...well, maybe they can cut the 2 screen support. Not many people will take advantage of that.

The PS2 was hard to program for, but didn't it have like 70% of the market at one time, making Xbox and GC share that 30%? I'm not going to include Nintendo on this, but compared to Xbox 360...PS3 has TONS of great games coming out:

-Metal Gear Solid 4
-Final Fantasy
-Gran Turismo
-Grand Theft Auto
-Devil May Cry
-Socom 4
-Next Gen of ICO
-Soul Caliber
-Ratchet and Clank
-Jak

and thats just the tip of the iceburg. What does Xbox 360 have?:

-Halo3
-Fable
-*cough*

Nintendo has it's games, which rock. But Xbox still lack those uber awesome games that no one else gets. I don't know, maybe Halo can save them again. But they have a good first start, new system at X-mas time. Can't beat that.

kuyu
Nov 4, 2005, 01:44 PM
and thats just the tip of the iceburg. What does Xbox 360 have?:

-Halo3
-Fable
-*cough*


Gears of War, Oblivion, Too Human, Kameo, Final Fantasy, NNN, PGR3, Forza 360, etc.

I own Gran Turismo 3 and 4 (plus that slick $150 racing wheel), and Forza. GT3 is awesome, but Forza was a better game than GT4. Forza 360 will be absolutely sick.

PS3 will be cool as well. I'm getting both. But to claim that one or the other sucks is crazy. Before 2010 we'll see 10 "must have" exclusives for both systems. Plus Nintendo's stuff.

It's a great time to be a gamer. Frag on.;)

Dagless
Nov 4, 2005, 05:33 PM
Yeah, the public really wants to play the piece of overpriced crap that is the Xbox 360. $600 to play online? No thank you. Honestly, it DOES NOT look next generation. The backgrounds are nice, but it just looks like a very well done Xbox game. But they still have time and room to grow.

Sony needs to keep everything in the system, and sell it at $399. Don't take all that cool stuff away...well, maybe they can cut the 2 screen support. Not many people will take advantage of that.

The PS2 was hard to program for, but didn't it have like 70% of the market at one time, making Xbox and GC share that 30%? I'm not going to include Nintendo on this, but compared to Xbox 360...PS3 has TONS of great games coming out:

-Metal Gear Solid 4
-Final Fantasy
-Gran Turismo
-Grand Theft Auto
-Devil May Cry
-Socom 4
-Next Gen of ICO
-Soul Caliber
-Ratchet and Clank
-Jak

and thats just the tip of the iceburg. What does Xbox 360 have?:

-Halo3
-Fable
-*cough*

Nintendo has it's games, which rock. But Xbox still lack those uber awesome games that no one else gets. I don't know, maybe Halo can save them again. But they have a good first start, new system at X-mas time. Can't beat that.

well maybe thats your opinion but for the rest of the world; the PS3 is getting less interest than the Rev and Xbox. well not less than, but its losing interest. maybe its the super expensive hardware cost (just like what you said about Xbox), the lack of 3rd party through uber expensive development cost, non-unified online gaming...

gaming is shifting.

DrNeroCF
Nov 4, 2005, 11:46 PM
M$ is forgetting one thing. The ps2 sold for one and a half reasons. Dvd and MGS2. The ecksbawks circle has no magical profit pushing brand new media player built into it like the ps2 did.

AP_piano295
Nov 5, 2005, 12:52 AM
I preordered the 360, and GFLPraxis is right... it cost about $700 for all the goodies. I bought the premium system, extra wireless controller, play and charge kit, year of Live, PDZ (wish I'd picked Kameo), and PGR3.

It's worth it to me, but I can see where that's waaay too much for a lot of people.

I'm also looking forward to the Rev and PS3. No telling which will "win" the console war. All will have their strengths and weaknesses, so it's really going to come down to personal preference.

But, if anyone thinks the PS3 bundle with all the goodies is going to be less than $700 they're totally crazy. I plan to set aside a cool grand for PS3 and all the extras (if I can get a job!). Hopefully it won't cost that much, but I'd rather be surprised by the price than dissapointed.

Go Blue!!!! any way I still think game systems are silly they do one thing and one thing only im all about the computer. Only game system I ever owned was an N64 and I got that for 30 bucks.

GFLPraxis
Nov 5, 2005, 01:49 AM
M$ is forgetting one thing. The ps2 sold for one and a half reasons. Dvd and MGS2. The ecksbawks circle has no magical profit pushing brand new media player built into it like the ps2 did.

DVD, MGS2, and a one-year-lead on the competition.

Sony still has Blu-ray and MGS, but this time Microsoft has the lead (but not as big) and Halo.

d_saum
Nov 6, 2005, 04:17 AM
I think a lot of people are forgetting that the ps3 is designed to be around for 10 years. I think it'll be introduced at around $300 and Sony will take the loss initially, and make it back over time. Also, I think ps3's online will be better this time out because it will have the ethernet built in. I know that everyone is afraid it will suck because they have no central service, but Im betting there is going to be MUCH more emphasis on the online portion this time around....and... its free. I never took my ps2 online because I need to go buy the adapter, but there are a few games that I would love to play online. For now my xbox is taking care of my live needs.

Also, I cannot believe that Microsoft is sticking with straight dvd. I think that is a horrible idea. I know what they've said about their "decompression technology" but still....9.5GB versus 50? PS3 definitely has the advantage. I think once the learning curve is over (for both the 360 and ps3), the ps3 will have much more room to grow. The cell is a bitch to program for, but has a ton of potential. I think the 360 will blow us away too once they start writing multi threaded games that REALLY take advantage of the other cores, but that wont be for a while, and there wont be as much available horsepower as the cell.


I dont understand all this taking the urine out of 2D sprites. I'd much rather play a 2D game than 3D anyday. but hey thats just me.

Wow, please dont take this the wrong way, but..... WHAT??? Just my opinion, but how could you ever want to play a 2d game over a beautiful 3d? 2d games seem to get boring sooooo quickly and then get frustrating when the difficulty steps up. Again, thats just my opinion as I LOVE great graphics and 3d.

PixelFactory
Nov 6, 2005, 06:46 PM
I think a lot of people are forgetting that the ps3 is designed to be around for 10 years. I think it'll be introduced at around $300 and Sony will take the loss initially, and make it back over time. Also, I think ps3's online will be better this time out because it will have the ethernet built in. I know that everyone is afraid it will suck because they have no central service, but Im betting there is going to be MUCH more emphasis on the online portion this time around....and... its free.

Sony, while not a cash poor company, may not have the money to take a big hit on PS3 sales and hold out for the long haul. The cell processor costs an additional $60 to the Xbox360 PowerPC and the BlueRay drive cost another $75 on top of the DVD-ROM. link (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/11/03/console/index.php) There is no way Sony can sell the PS3 at $300, more like $500-$600. Even die hard Playstation fans might find this too expensive. And what is stopping sony from charging for an online service. Microsoft has already shown a working model., I think Sony will start something similar to xbox live and price it about the same.

I don't think the PS3 will be a bad machine. I just don't think it will be everything Sony is saying it is. Their track record says it won't be as powerful as they are saying.

ReanimationLP
Nov 6, 2005, 08:05 PM
Xbox 360 is nice. :D

Hey, 60 dollar games, wasnt that the prices during the N64 and early PSX days not-to-mention the SNES? o.O

kuyu
Nov 6, 2005, 08:34 PM
I agree about the cost of the PS3. Cell (+$60), Blu-Ray (+$75), dual-HDMI(+$5), wifi(+$10), and every type of memory slot known to man(+$10) will drive up the cost of the PS3 substantially(+$160!). Throw in the fact that there are still no Blu-Ray or Cell production facilities in existance. Those cost billions.

Even if Sony can produce enough to cut the cost in half, they are still left with a piece of hardware which costs $80 more to produce than the competitions product.

Lets say the 360 costs $500 to produce. In this case MS is losing $100 on each one (which is the hit they took on the original xbox, IIRC). That means that the PS3 will cost ~$650 to produce. If Sony launches at $400, that's a $250 hit on everyone sold. Say they sell 10 million in the first year. That's 2.5 BILLION lost in one year alone! They only made 2 billion off of the PS2 in total.

There's no way Sony will risk everything they gained last generation. If they sell it for $500, then they only lose $150/unit. At least in this case they don't give up all their profits from last generation in one year.

Stampyhead
Nov 6, 2005, 11:48 PM
Were any of the demos using an HD compatible display? I got to imagine that would improve the quality some...
I'm not much of a gamer, but when I was at the SEMA show in Las Vegas this weekend they had several 360's at the Ford exhibit hooked up to wide screen HD monitors. The graphics were amazing! I thought I was watching a movie at first. I don't know what the game was, some car driving thing (like I said, I'm not much of a gamer!). I was very impressed, to say the least.

d_saum
Nov 7, 2005, 01:27 AM
There is no way Sony can sell the PS3 at $300, more like $500-$600. Even die hard Playstation fans might find this too expensive. And what is stopping sony from charging for an online service. Microsoft has already shown a working model., I think Sony will start something similar to xbox live and price it about the same.

My point exactly... $500 - $600 might be too much for even "Die hard" fans, so why would they risk all these production costs and not sell any, when they could take a loss and at least make some of the money back. If its going to be produced for 10 years, they can take the hit up front and make it back when production costs go down and also make profit on the software.

Also, Sony has stated that they are not going to have a central online service like xbox live. Google news it and see for yourself.

GFLPraxis
Nov 7, 2005, 03:45 AM
Sony, while not a cash poor company, may not have the money to take a big hit on PS3 sales and hold out for the long haul. The cell processor costs an additional $60 to the Xbox360 PowerPC and the BlueRay drive cost another $75 on top of the DVD-ROM. link (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/11/03/console/index.php) There is no way Sony can sell the PS3 at $300, more like $500-$600. Even die hard Playstation fans might find this too expensive. And what is stopping sony from charging for an online service. Microsoft has already shown a working model., I think Sony will start something similar to xbox live and price it about the same.

I don't think the PS3 will be a bad machine. I just don't think it will be everything Sony is saying it is. Their track record says it won't be as powerful as they are saying.


Things to note:

1) That was an estimate. Merrill Lynch can't know the exact price on a processor and disk medium that have never been produced or sold publicly. They can only guess.
2) $500 build cost would mean they'd probably sell it for $450.
3) Sony's statements indicate a Fall release date in the U.S. and that article is stating it would cost $500 to build in SPRING by their estimation.

Sorry, I'm sticking with my original $400-$450 estimate (with no hard drive included of course).

kuyu
Nov 7, 2005, 08:20 AM
Sorry, I'm sticking with my original $400-$450 estimate (with no hard drive included of course).

Yeah, I agree with this estimate. The "Core" PS3 will sell for $400-$450. My bet is $450. The "Premium" PS3 will be $600, but it will come with an 80 gig HDD, and two wireless controllers.

bitfactory
Nov 7, 2005, 09:44 AM
Yeah, I agree with this estimate. The "Core" PS3 will sell for $400-$450. My bet is $450. The "Premium" PS3 will be $600, but it will come with an 80 gig HDD, and two wireless controllers.

"PS3 will be bundled with a selection of preloaded films, TV programs and games and sell for between $300-$400."

Straight from the horse's mouth (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051105-5530.html).

GFLPraxis
Nov 7, 2005, 09:58 AM
"PS3 will be bundled with a selection of preloaded films, TV programs and games and sell for between $300-$400."

Straight from the horse's mouth (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051105-5530.html).

w00t. Thanks!

GFLPraxis
Nov 7, 2005, 10:03 AM
Yeah, I agree with this estimate. The "Core" PS3 will sell for $400-$450. My bet is $450. The "Premium" PS3 will be $600, but it will come with an 80 gig HDD, and two wireless controllers.

Personally I don't think there will be a premium PS3; I think they'll sell the "Core" PS3 and then sell the hard drive. But it's always possible.

Remember, Sony believes that selling two versions of the console creates too much confusion.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=11209

Speaking at the European Game Developers' Conference in London today, when asked if Sony might follow in the Redwood giant's footsteps the VP of studios replied: "Unlikely."

"Are there two versions of the Xbox 360 that people want to buy, is my question," he continued. "I don't know."

"This is my personal view, not my corporate view, but when I look at those formats, I think it just confuses the audience. They don't know which one to buy, developers don't know which one to create for, and retailers don't know which one to stock."

"So I think we wouldn't take that strategy. We wouldn't create confusion," he concluded.

However, Harrison did go on to suggest that consumers will have a variety of options to choose from in the longer term.

"There have been various versions and variants of PlayStations in the past - some run through the hardware and some through the software, and that's worked pretty well for us, offering different value propositions to the consumer."

"Exactly what we do with the launch? Too early to tell."

Harrison did commend Microsoft with regard to the success of the Xbox Live service, telling the audience: "Microsoft has done a lot of things right, and there are certainly things that are going to form the model for many of the high quality consumer experiences that we will deliver with PS3."

"But I think our role is always to go beyond, to push further," he continued.

"I'm not in a position today to share with you all the details but PS3 was a network platform from the very beginning, and that is designed into every aspect of the machine."

However, Harrison did state that Sony is planning to offer a "more open platform" -a service that will give consumers access to content which is either free, or sold by publishers themselves.

kuyu
Nov 7, 2005, 11:09 AM
I think it would be a mistake not to include the harddrive. But knowing Sony, I'd say that it's likely that you won't be able to save a game with the standard system. That's going to cost you extra. So going online isn't exactly "free" is it.

Easy if you already have a duostick. But I'll have to go out and buy memory just to save my games. Do the other mem ports on the PS3 work like the memory card in the PS2, or are they just for uploading photos and stuff? I can't see Sony allowing us to buy other companies memory technologies for their product. They're whole plan is for PS3 to intice us to buy other products, like wega TV's and spyware'd, DRM'd, ATRAC songs (that only work on Sony players).

GFLPraxis
Nov 7, 2005, 12:42 PM
I think it would be a mistake not to include the harddrive. But knowing Sony, I'd say that it's likely that you won't be able to save a game with the standard system. That's going to cost you extra. So going online isn't exactly "free" is it.

Easy if you already have a duostick. But I'll have to go out and buy memory just to save my games. Do the other mem ports on the PS3 work like the memory card in the PS2, or are they just for uploading photos and stuff? I can't see Sony allowing us to buy other companies memory technologies for their product. They're whole plan is for PS3 to intice us to buy other products, like wega TV's and spyware'd, DRM'd, ATRAC songs (that only work on Sony players).

Well, Sony has a point that I agree with. Different users have different requirements (and as they say, capacity will always get bigger and whatever they include will never be enough). With the PS3 having Linux preinstalled and possibly the ability to rip DVD's to the hard drive (and apply a DRM to prevent you from sending it to someone), the PS3 serving as a network server (allowing you to dump files from your computer onto it, using it for backup, file storage, work, plus all the multimedia stuff XBox 360 has), the PS3 will have a LOT of use for the storage. More than the 360 does. Then again, some people will only need a hard drive for game updates. So some people may need a 20 GB drive, but on the PS3 some might want the 80 GB drive. So it makes sense to give them a choice. Unlike the 360, going without a hard drive doesn't cripple the system as its not required for stuff like backwards compatability.

Jadeite312
Nov 7, 2005, 01:32 PM
The winner is the ps3 by default. The xbox360 gets final fantasy online which doesnt sell systems while the ps3 gets the next Final Fantasy and dragon quest game which will sell a truck load and make the system win in japan. In the end it call comes down to the games and most developers are in japan

Dagless
Nov 7, 2005, 01:58 PM
The winner is the ps3 by default. The xbox360 gets final fantasy online which doesnt sell systems while the ps3 gets the next Final Fantasy and dragon quest game which will sell a truck load and make the system win in japan. In the end it call comes down to the games and most developers are in japan

whilst the DS is trumping PSP sales overall, can I apply that Final Fantasy rule there too? In that the DS has a new Chrono game, a game by the fathers of Final Fantasy, Crystal Chronicles and Final Fantasy 3. does that mean it wins?
The Xbox sold less in Japan than the Gamecube, the Cube had more japanese developers, but overall the Cube came in 3rd in overall sales.
Flawed logic. sorry.

kuyu
Nov 7, 2005, 03:16 PM
I just played the 360 at the EBGames in the local mall. I saw King Kong and Call of Duty II. All I can say is.... WOW! CoDII being in HD makes a HUGE difference. The level of detail is far higher than anything from last generation. CoD and King Kong both spank HL2 (and I play it @ 1280 with the options maxed out). Hands down the best gfx I've ever seen in person.

They had it hooked up to a samsung HD LCD. The controllers are perfect. Lighter and smaller than the xbox S. The 360 itself is about the size (if not smaller) than the original PS2. This thing is going to rock. Only two more weeks!!!

nimbus
Nov 7, 2005, 11:05 PM
I just played the 360 at the EBGames in the local mall. I saw King Kong and Call of Duty II. All I can say is.... WOW! CoDII being in HD makes a HUGE difference. The level of detail is far higher than anything from last generation. CoD and King Kong both spank HL2 (and I play it @ 1280 with the options maxed out). Hands down the best gfx I've ever seen in person.

They had it hooked up to a samsung HD LCD. The controllers are perfect. Lighter and smaller than the xbox S. The 360 itself is about the size (if not smaller) than the original PS2. This thing is going to rock. Only two more weeks!!!

Dude, calm the hell down. Do you have an HD LCD TV at home? King Kong didn't look all that great, and sure at hell didn't play that well. It looks like an Xbox +1 or a PC game at best. Backgrounds on 360 are nice, but that's about all that impressed me. I was expecting much more from a nex-gen system.

Call of Duty II's bg's was nice. The explosions and stuff. But up close, god. I thought it was just an Xbox again. The controllers are nice. About the same as the current ones.

I wanted a reason besides FFXI online to get a 360, but there isn't one for me. I was disappointed by the lackluster graphics. Yes, it's better than the current generation, but it isn't the "step beyond" that nex-gen systems take. SNES vs. PSX. PSX vs. Dreamcast. When I saw Sonic on the Dreamcast, I was like "whoa, that awesome." That was at launch. When I saw the 360's games, I was like "nice backgrounds, but it looks like a slightly better Xbox. Well, it has potential." My exact words as I played at Walmart.

Oh well, I hope it does well, xmas is coming.

kuyu
Nov 8, 2005, 12:48 AM
Dude, calm the hell down. Do you have an HD LCD TV at home? King Kong didn't look all that great, and sure at hell didn't play that well. It looks like an Xbox +1 or a PC game at best. Backgrounds on 360 are nice, but that's about all that impressed me. I was expecting much more from a nex-gen system.

Hmmm. Yeah, I do have an HDTV. When you compare current consoles on an HDTV to the 360 on an HDTV it's a night and day difference. Sorry if I'm too excited for your tastes. Don't buy one if you don't like it. I do, am I am.:rolleyes:

DrNeroCF
Nov 8, 2005, 03:08 AM
Played it at best buy. Kameo gets a 'meh' from me for feeling like an n64 game. And Call of Duty looks like it does running on my Powerbook...

Meh at the ecksbawks circle.

takao
Nov 8, 2005, 10:18 AM
anybody knows when thsoe kiosks will come to europe ? .. i mean it's about time.. launch is not that far away

jared_kipe
Nov 8, 2005, 10:44 AM
I have a question for you all, I didn't preorder cause I didn't know it was going to be such a big deal. Now what stores are going to be selling the higher bundle on launch day? Ebgames is a No, Target is a Yes, but they said they would only have limited quantities. Anyone know a really good place to go to, possibly one that didn't do any preorders?

nimbus
Nov 8, 2005, 11:21 AM
Yeah, I wanted to see Need for Speed, but it only had a video.

All the demo games looked 'meh' to me too. Not nex-gen. Looked better than current, but not nex-gen. Oh well. I'm looking forward to Revolution and PS3. PS3 will blow 360 out of it's shallow water. They need better games for Xbox in general. The original one was so lackluster. Besides Halo and Fable, the main reason to get one was if their were multi-platform releases. Xbox always looked better than PS2's stuff, though some people like PS2's controls better. I'd love to see that new Matrix: Path of Neo on Xbox 360. That'd be badass. I'd actually think about getting one then.

GFLPraxis
Nov 8, 2005, 11:36 AM
Yeah, I wanted to see Need for Speed, but it only had a video.

All the demo games looked 'meh' to me too. Not nex-gen. Looked better than current, but not nex-gen. Oh well. I'm looking forward to Revolution and PS3. PS3 will blow 360 out of it's shallow water. They need better games for Xbox in general. The original one was so lackluster. Besides Halo and Fable, the main reason to get one was if their were multi-platform releases. Xbox always looked better than PS2's stuff, though some people like PS2's controls better. I'd love to see that new Matrix: Path of Neo on Xbox 360. That'd be badass. I'd actually think about getting one then.

My guess on the reason for that:

Kameo was originally for GameCube, then XBox, and got moved to 360.
King Kong is a current-gen game with upgraded graphics for 360.
Call of Duty 2 is a current-gen PC game (better than current gen consoles but less than next gen consoles) ported to XBox 360.

None of the games there were games designed ground up for the 360.

GFLPraxis
Nov 8, 2005, 12:36 PM
Or, alternatively, the XBox 360 lackzorz good demozorz. They shoulda put a next gen game such as PGZ or Gears of War.

I can't wait to see some real PS3 demos though, especially since it looks like Sony's saying the system will be $300-$400.

Dagless
Nov 8, 2005, 01:37 PM
Or, alternatively, the XBox 360 lackzorz good demozorz. They shoulda put a next gen game such as PGZ or Gears of War.

I can't wait to see some real PS3 demos though, especially since it looks like Sony's saying the system will be $300-$400.

I will give you my soul if the PS3 is launched at £168-£225. A PS2 with a few games and an extra controller probably costs £199, a PSP with a game, better memory stick etc. will cost around £225.

My guess, with BluRay, the PS3 will fetch be launched at £399 with next to no sales as people have already paid out for an Xbox, Live and a few games. at least thats the public who don't follow console releases and just buy whats 1) cheap and 2) has pretty visuals.

risc
Nov 8, 2005, 02:32 PM
GFLPraxis is saying the PS3 may launch in the US for USD$300-USD$400 you can't just chuck that price in a currency convertor and assume it will be the launch price of the PS3 in the UK, especially when you consider if something sells for USD$400 it usually goes for EUD$350-EUD$400. The US PS3 launch will be just like every other console launch, the price will be "reasonable" for the US and suck everywhere (Japan not included) else!

Personally I'm yet to see anything on the 360 that interests me, other than the fact it is new and I don't have 1. The PS3 and Revolution are just boxes at the moment show me the games!

AlmightyG5
Nov 8, 2005, 03:10 PM
the reason why everyone is favoring the 360 over the PS3 currently, is because the 360 is coming out in two weeks. The 360 is playable at some stores, and there are actual game videos and tons of info on the 360 on the internet. Wait until March when the PS3 comes out in Japan and we get real info on the PS3 and the games. People are going to be kicking themselves for buying the 360 and not waiting for the PS3. Don't get me wrong, the 360 will be a great system....until the PS3 comes out.

kuyu
Nov 8, 2005, 03:30 PM
the reason why everyone is favoring the 360 over the PS3 currently, is because the 360 is coming out in two weeks. The 360 is playable at some stores, and there are actual game videos and tons of info on the 360 on the internet. Wait until March when the PS3 comes out in Japan and we get real info on the PS3 and the games. People are going to be kicking themselves for buying the 360 and not waiting for the PS3. Don't get me wrong, the 360 will be a great system....until the PS3 comes out.

The simple answer is to get both plus a revolution. That way you get to play all the exclusives and then buy the cross-platform titles for your favorite system (PS3 for graphics, 360 for Live, Rev for the controls).

Mr Maui
Nov 8, 2005, 03:32 PM
How about THIS?:

http://www.thocp.net/software/games/consoles/mattel/pictures/mattel_football_large.jpg
Scary, but I actually remember this thing ... and it was all the rage with it's red LED dashes moving around the screen. :D

GFLPraxis
Nov 8, 2005, 07:49 PM
I will give you my soul if the PS3 is launched at £168-£225. A PS2 with a few games and an extra controller probably costs £199, a PSP with a game, better memory stick etc. will cost around £225.

My guess, with BluRay, the PS3 will fetch be launched at £399 with next to no sales as people have already paid out for an Xbox, Live and a few games. at least thats the public who don't follow console releases and just buy whats 1) cheap and 2) has pretty visuals.


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051105-5530.html


Sony says:
"PS3 is a subsidized Blu-ray play that will sell 20 million units. The first HD player will be on the market for $1,000. PS3 could be at $300 or $400. Sony will be selling them at a loss the first six months to a year just to get Blu-ray players out in the market. So studios realize they need to have their content on it," he said.

However, we know how companies love to charge much more in the UK.


GFLPraxis is saying the PS3 may launch in the US for USD$300-USD$400 you can't just chuck that price in a currency convertor and assume it will be the launch price of the PS3 in the UK, especially when you consider if something sells for USD$400 it usually goes for EUD$350-EUD$400. The US PS3 launch will be just like every other console launch, the price will be "reasonable" for the US and suck everywhere (Japan not included) else!

Exactly.

zathras
Nov 9, 2005, 09:29 AM
Ok I've totally been sucked in by the hype for the 360 (as I knew I was going to be) so I'm planning on selling my PSP and Xbox to pick it up. I'm looking forward to Perfect Dark Zero, PGR3 and Amped 3 (was a big fan of 1 and 2 on the 'box).


I think I'm just going to hit Walmart at midnight or Target when they open on release day to get it since I didn't preorder it.

katchow
Nov 9, 2005, 11:49 AM
The simple answer is to get both plus a revolution. That way you get to play all the exclusives and then buy the cross-platform titles for your favorite system (PS3 for graphics, 360 for Live, Rev for the controls).

can i borrow some money?

Dagless
Nov 9, 2005, 03:01 PM
can i borrow some money?

that got me interested. some estimated numbers;

--- Consoles
Xbox: £299 (is that the premium one?)
PS3: £399
Revolution: £139
--- Single Games (not added in total)
Xbox games: £50
PS3 games: £50
Revolution: £30-£40 (£35)
--- Estimated number of games bought in first week
3 Xbox games: £150
3 PS3 games: £150
3 Rev games: £105
--- Extras
Xbox Live Gold: £50pa
720 24" HDTV (lets not go too crazy): £700
cheap 5.1: £50
Xbox Wifi dongle: £75

=est. £2117/$3758

happy savings! of course its all estimates. but I was curious to how much it would cost folk saying they're going for all 3. personally, this is just me, but I couldn't justify paying all that just for video games. again just to bullet proof this as my opinion; this is my opinion! :)

DrNeroCF
Nov 9, 2005, 03:23 PM
The controller is quite nice, though. I know you can use it with windows using USB, but is it HID compatible for mac?

jared_kipe
Nov 9, 2005, 06:12 PM
The controller is quite nice, though. I know you can use it with windows using USB, but is it HID compatible for mac?
with a driver, look around the forums, I've talked about it many times

nimbus
Nov 10, 2005, 09:48 AM
The simple answer is to get both plus a revolution. That way you get to play all the exclusives and then buy the cross-platform titles for your favorite system (PS3 for graphics, 360 for Live, Rev for the controls).

No my friend, you don't get the point. Why get a 360 for Live if there aren't that many good games to play? Paying $600 to play 2-3 decent games online isn't worth it. I'd get it just for ONE good game to play online if the system had other good/great games.

You should get a PS3 and Rev, or a 360 and Rev. I think I'm going to wait for the real next generation systems to come out. Xbox 360 is very lucky that it's coming out with no competition. Can you imagine what would happen if the PS3 came out 2 weeks after the 360? Dead 360, yep.

M$ had to rush that puppy out, and if they want sales, I don't blaim them. I just feel sorry for the saps paying $600-1000 on the 360 bundles.

At least with PS3, you get a nice bonus; BluRay DVD Player. Not to mention uber games. With Rev you get the innovative controller and fun/cheap games. With 360, you just get some ok games, some not even ok.



:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:

JDOG_
Nov 10, 2005, 10:14 AM
Halo 2 was it even though, to me, it was the single most fundamentally flawed game I've ever played. If only 1 was online.

Not to thread-jack, but I'd love an expansion on that statement. To me Halo 2 is one of the best FPS shooters I've played in a long time with an enjoyable, plot-filled campaign, some great weapon balance and lasting company support on the part of Bungie in stepping in and making sure the online multiplayer experience is an ever-changing and enjoyable gaming experience.

Flawed, lets talk about Doom 3...

ON TOPIC: I have yet to see one of these kiosks, but frankly I'm just happy this system is coming out at the time it is. With PS3 pushing over a year the XBOX will do nicely in the next 12+ months.

GFLPraxis
Nov 10, 2005, 10:44 AM
You should get a PS3 and Rev, or a 360 and Rev.

I agree with this, and think that's actually Nintendo's strategy. Think about it. If everyone buys either a PS3 and a Rev or a 360 and a Rev, with the Rev as the second console, even though people will consider the Rev their 'second system' Nintendo will make more than Microsoft or Sony off it.

PixelFactory
Nov 10, 2005, 11:04 AM
At least with PS3, you get a nice bonus; BluRay DVD Player.

And here is why Sony is making the PS3. BluRay. They want all the royalties from the sale of BluRay movies. If it doesn't become the standard for hi-def movies, Sony will be in serious financial trouble. With the development cost of BluRay and the PS3 plus the hit they are going to take on each sale, Sony's pockets may not be deep enough to weather out the storm.

As far as how much better the PS3 will be over the Xbox360? We still haven't seen anything playable yet on final hardware. All we have seen are "artist rendition" movies and footage of things running in a graphics engine on development kits. What will the look like when they add in AI, physics engines and such instead of completely scripted events?

Dagless
Nov 10, 2005, 12:43 PM
Not to thread-jack, but I'd love an expansion on that statement. To me Halo 2 is one of the best FPS shooters I've played in a long time with an enjoyable, plot-filled campaign, some great weapon balance and lasting company support on the part of Bungie in stepping in and making sure the online multiplayer experience is an ever-changing and enjoyable gaming experience.

Flawed, lets talk about Doom 3...

ON TOPIC: I have yet to see one of these kiosks, but frankly I'm just happy this system is coming out at the time it is. With PS3 pushing over a year the XBOX will do nicely in the next 12+ months.

There are small problems like textures loading problems, that was just a visual pain. What year is this? to see textures popping up like that brought me back to the Sega Saturn when all they could have done was sacrifice a half second extra loading time.
The plot was just utter crap.
Where Halo 1 was innovative, new, it brought something fresh to the FPS genre whereas 2 thought it would be smart by doing the oh-so typical method of just enhancing Halo 1. That sounds like it should be the way, but Halo 1 spoiled me, Halo 2 let me down. Especially how they thought that adding in the 'enemies perspective' levels would be a fresh thing; it stunk. I literally had to shut my eyes and cross my fingers hoping this would end soon, that we'd go back to the master chief levels in the vain hope of finding out the story. but no. we'll add an octopus in there and BAM! clichéd ending.
Multiplayer in Halo is just terrible, IMO. Overpowered weapons are a little lame.
I mean if you enjoyed it fine, but i'm saying I found Halo 2 an utterly epic disappointment. especially considered how hyped I was from the trailers. Games like that, and HL2, should have a sticker on the box saying "warning! this game will NOT reveal any plotline! wait for the 3rd game".
and don't even get me started on co-op mode -_-

nimbus
Nov 10, 2005, 03:31 PM
I swear, THIS should happen to people that buy a Xbox 360

http://formymac.com/MR/XBox360.mov

What the hell is the commercial about? It gets your interest, but has NOTHING TO DO WITH VIDEO GAMES OR THE 360. Have fun playing the 360, lol.

PS3 > Rev > 360

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Dagless
Nov 10, 2005, 04:17 PM
...What the hell is the commercial about? It gets your interest, but has NOTHING TO DO WITH VIDEO GAMES OR THE 360. Have fun playing the 360, lol...

welcome to 21st century advertising ;)

and have fun playing the PS3 ;) for less you could always stick a better graphics card in the PS2?

GFLPraxis
Nov 10, 2005, 09:01 PM
Nah, BluRay DVD player is a big plus also.

:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:

It could be a plus or minus. If HD-DVD wins the format war, there will be no manufacturers that make Blu-ray plants, therefore Sony will have to pay for every single factory. Without an industry behind it, the price of Blu-ray will never go down and thus, the PS3's price will remain absurdly high throughout it's lifespan.

On the other hand, if Blu-ray wins the format wars, over the years Blu-ray will drop in price rapidly and the PS3 will also become much cheaper.

Sony's taking a gamble.

PixelFactory
Nov 10, 2005, 10:49 PM
It could be a plus or minus. If HD-DVD wins the format war, there will be no manufacturers that make Blu-ray plants, therefore Sony will have to pay for every single factory. Without an industry behind it, the price of Blu-ray will never go down and thus, the PS3's price will remain absurdly high throughout it's lifespan.

On the other hand, if Blu-ray wins the format wars, over the years Blu-ray will drop in price rapidly and the PS3 will also become much cheaper.

Sony's taking a gamble.

Yeah, a big gamble. The PS3 will most likely release this spring in Japan but won't hit other markets until next winter. Unlike the Xbox360s worldwide launch. Also, Toshiba is letting Chinese manufacturers build HD-DVD players to saturate the market before BluRay. Link (http://www.ultimateavmag.com/news/110305hddvdchina/) Look for HD-DVD players to start pricing at about $1,000 but drop quickly to around $300 by summer. The PS3 is going to have a battle on two fronts.

Piarco
Nov 11, 2005, 09:59 AM
that got me interested. some estimated numbers;

--- Consoles
Xbox: £299 (is that the premium one?)
PS3: £399
Revolution: £139
--- Single Games (not added in total)
Xbox games: £50
PS3 games: £50
Revolution: £30-£40 (£35)
--- Estimated number of games bought in first week
3 Xbox games: £150
3 PS3 games: £150
3 Rev games: £105
--- Extras
Xbox Live Gold: £50pa
720 24" HDTV (lets not go too crazy): £700
cheap 5.1: £50
Xbox Wifi dongle: £75

=est. £2117/$3758

happy savings! of course its all estimates. but I was curious to how much it would cost folk saying they're going for all 3. personally, this is just me, but I couldn't justify paying all that just for video games. again just to bullet proof this as my opinion; this is my opinion! :)

I've done something similar to see what my idea xbox360 setup would be:

xbox360: £279
xbox wifi bridge: £60
Second wireless controller: £33
Samsung 26" HD LCD TV: £611 (already bought)
xbox live gold: £50pa
3 games: £120

Total: £1153 (or £542 minus the TV, and what will be coming out of my account when its ready to ship)

Expensive business!

kuyu
Nov 11, 2005, 10:15 AM
Last night I realized something awesome about the 360. My friends and I are all about to finish college, and most of us are moving away. Then it dawned on me; how can we all still hang out from hundreds of miles away? Xbox 360.

This way we don't all have to buy the same games to chat with eachother, because it's a unified structure. I showed my non-gamer friend what the 360 does besides "better graphics" and he's getting one ASAP. This guy hasn't owned a console since SNES because he thinks playing games alone is boring.

Now I get the M$ plan. N64 had Mario and Goldeneye, PS2 had GTA and GT3, Xbox had Halo, 360 has Live 2. It's the "killer app" of killer app's. Live is something that non-gamers will use too. Cool...:cool:

Dagless
Nov 11, 2005, 12:27 PM
I PLAYED A 360

initial impressions were not good. right now I can easily say I will not be purchasing one of these for a long long time. a games run down;

Kameo: Dear god. I've heard Xbox 360 fans saying that this is a Zelda beater. its not even close. Its just terrible. further adding to Rare's downfall in my mind.
King Kong: I was absolutely lost in this game. It seems to be nothing more than a tech demo. You play a camera man? I only played a minute or so on this.
Some War Game: bad feeling of movement. very good smoke effect though.
The Xbox Live interface was just tripe. Typical Microsoft design: lackluster.

overall nothing made me want the 360, nothing brought me back to it. I could happily never see or touch one ever again. if anything its pushed me away from it. The games, the controller, the sheer size of the machine (I was imagining this to be quite small, ho hum). The machine looks cheap too, specifically the disc drive. it looks like a cheap horrible shiny plastic.

Plus the fact you have to spend an absolute fortune just to play it... no thanks. This has pushed me towards the PS3 as my 2nd console now. If it plays PSX games then i'd be very happy.
This thing will never replace my Media Centre regular Xbox. that streams my videos; the only question on my Media Centre checklist.

ps. Why cant Microsoft make a good startup video?

EDIT: my mate didn't like it either. "not getting that this year".

GFLPraxis
Nov 11, 2005, 02:06 PM
King Kong: I was absolutely lost in this game. It seems to be nothing more than a tech demo. You play a camera man? I only played a minute or so on this.

Incorrect; I had the same problem, took me like three sessions to figure it out.

The problem with this demo is that they never tell you what the controls are. Face the black guy and press A twice while standing still, and he gives you the gun.

The game is very good and immersive, but they don't tell you the controls and never explain what to do so it gets very confusing.

iKwick7
Nov 11, 2005, 02:39 PM
This entire thread is so biased. All I will say is this- the xbox 360 DEMO KIOSK is absolute garbage, not the 360 or the games themselves. The demos and the movies on that demo kiosk are so friggin old that it isn;t even funny. horrible call on M$. They need to put good 360 game demos in there- Madden, NBA2ks or NBA Live (insane graphics) or PGR3. That will drastically change everyone's impressions for the better.

Dagless
Nov 11, 2005, 03:31 PM
This entire thread is so biased. All I will say is this- the xbox 360 DEMO KIOSK is absolute garbage, not the 360 or the games themselves. The demos and the movies on that demo kiosk are so friggin old that it isn;t even funny. horrible call on M$. They need to put good 360 game demos in there- Madden, NBA2ks or NBA Live (insane graphics) or PGR3. That will drastically change everyone's impressions for the better.

yea because the controller, interface, size and material of the console has changed.
If this was Nintendo or Sony i'd eagerly await the cut-down size edition.

Thing is I wish i could like the Xbox360. I was hoping for a 2nd 'classic' style console to compliment my Rev. The 360 was the best choice for me. It has a good online service (even though id settle for Live silver), cheaper price tag and can play Halo 1. but now. I hope they do something good. first impressions of that thing were terrible for me. Similar to the first Xbox funnily enough. I warmed to it a year or 3 later.

kuyu
Nov 11, 2005, 03:34 PM
Wait until you're playing one at a friends house. Opinions will change. I thought the xbox demo unit was crap until I played a retail model with an actual game. Now it's my favorite console of the three.

highres
Nov 11, 2005, 04:07 PM
I will wait until Gears of War comes out then I will buy an X360...Until then no current X360 titles interest me... G.O.W. takes full advantage of the rendering and processing power of the 360 and implements the new UT engine...Otherwise most of the current titles look subpar...

GFLPraxis
Nov 11, 2005, 04:12 PM
Wait until you're playing one at a friends house. Opinions will change. I thought the xbox demo unit was crap until I played a retail model with an actual game. Now it's my favorite console of the three.

The other two which you also have not tried ;)

GFLPraxis
Nov 11, 2005, 04:13 PM
This entire thread is so biased. All I will say is this- the xbox 360 DEMO KIOSK is absolute garbage, not the 360 or the games themselves. The demos and the movies on that demo kiosk are so friggin old that it isn;t even funny. horrible call on M$. They need to put good 360 game demos in there- Madden, NBA2ks or NBA Live (insane graphics) or PGR3. That will drastically change everyone's impressions for the better.

As I pointed out earlier, all the demos on the 360 are ports from single-core systems; Call of Duty from PC, Kameo from GameCube and XBox, and King Kong from all three current gen systems. I imagine that they're likely not designed for multithreading and probably can't take full advantage of the hardware.

Dagless
Nov 11, 2005, 04:34 PM
**i dont know how but i accidentally double posted my earlier post. madness!**

takao
Nov 11, 2005, 05:07 PM
**i dont know how but i accidentally double posted my earlier post. madness!**

yeah i got the typical new message email and was kinda puzzled..."huh i read that before..." ;)

tomorow i'm gonna take a look if something changed on the xbox360 kiosk front here.. so far non sighted

Phat_Pat
Nov 11, 2005, 05:08 PM
just played X360 myself..... it was awesome with the amount of stuff happening but i can't say i was too impressed....

Phat_Pat
Nov 12, 2005, 02:14 AM
You mean to tell me that you think people are going to pay +$600 to fricken CHAT???? When there's Yahoo Messenger, AIM, iChat, etc???? Dude, what crack are you smoking? I know you are trying to promote the Xbox 360, but at least have a good reason to get the thing. Geez.
why would you spend $600

its only $299/$399


just don't buy a bundle

GFLPraxis
Nov 12, 2005, 03:07 AM
why would you spend $600

its only $299/$399


just don't buy a bundle

+ $20 for the headset (required, though included in the $399 model)
+ $100 if you want wireless

But yeah, $600 was if you wanted to play an online game.

Oh, this gives you only voice chat, which is FREE in AIM, MSN, Yahoo, and well everything.

Want video? Buy the camera (no idea the price) and $50 a year XBox Live subscription.

It's a lot just to chat, sorry.

afsammie
Nov 12, 2005, 09:20 AM
Wait until you're playing one at a friends house. Opinions will change. I thought the xbox demo unit was crap until I played a retail model with an actual game. Now it's my favorite console of the three.

I've got to respectully disagree. I went to an XBOX 360 event where they had nice couches, amazing TVs, and free booze, which is much better than any of my friends' houses, and I came away feeling like the XBOX 360 was the single biggest letdown of my video gaming life. I played full retail versions of NBA Live, Perfect Dark, Project Gotham, Call of Duty, and Dead or Alive. Maybe I went into it with high expectations, though.

I've bought every console system since the NES as soon as it came out (except 3DO & Jaguar), but not this time. Microsoft talked me out of it. Granted, I'll probably buy one down the road if they come out with some amazing exclusives, more than just Halo, but for right now, I'm fine, with several great games on the horizon for all three current consoles (can't wait for Zelda).

I can't believe they're getting away with charging this much for such a lackluster update. At first I thought the high price was just a premium for such superior hardware, but I now realize it's for advertising. The whole XBOX 360 vs. PS3 argument gives too much credibility to both; either vs. current gen consoles is more apt, at least for the time being.

Or maybe we're just spoiled and the video game industry is beginning the inevitable regress. Maybe Sony and Nintendo will do the same thing. We should have seen it coming when Microsoft and Sony stepped in and Sega stepped out. It was a fun alliance while it lasted.

kuyu
Nov 12, 2005, 09:25 AM
"Chat and... Chat and... anybody? You in the back."
"Play games, maybe?"

Yeah, so what I meant before was that the 360 will be a cool way to hangout with people in different cities. We're all guys. It's not like we plan to just use the thing like a phone. Many an alien will meet his demise while we drunkenly shout into 360 headsets from all over the country.

Nimbus, I understand that you don't want a 360, and that you don't think anyone else should want one either. So just don't buy one. And my reasons for buying one are (in order):
1. Live 360
2. Live Arcade
3. Livingroom tunes
4. PGR3, Amped 3, CoDII, PDZ, Kameo, Halo 3, etc.

takao
Nov 12, 2005, 10:30 AM
Nimbus, I understand that you don't want a 360, and that you don't think anyone else should want one either. So just don't buy one. And my reasons for buying one are (in order):
1. Live 360
2. Live Arcade
3. Livingroom tunes
4. PGR3, Amped 3, CoDII, PDZ, Kameo, Halo 3, etc.

well personally i would rate the games first ...

i'm still pissed about the absence of the xbox360 at the GC. sure living trees inside were awesome but not a single playable demo was kinda..well lame.. but the booth babes at least had xbox green converse all-stars ;)

that aside i checked all big 3 chains here and no luck yet: no kioskes.. looks like mainland europe gets the typical console treatment ...

Dagless
Nov 12, 2005, 11:03 AM
Yea in the UK pretty much every shop that sells games has a 360 stand. Currys, HMV, Game, Virgin Megastores, think I saw one in WHSmiths, Dixons, Gamestation. i wouldn't worry for your mainland Europeans though. if your like me then the demo stand will push you away from getting one.

denial
Nov 12, 2005, 11:10 AM
Yea in the UK pretty much every shop that sells games has a 360 stand. Currys, HMV, Game, Virgin Megastores, think I saw one in WHSmiths, Dixons, Gamestation. i wouldn't worry for your mainland Europeans though. if your like me then the demo stand will push you away from getting one.

Saw the HMV 360 stand. Will wait for the first wave to be released and then see what other games look like in '06. Will no doubt pick up a 360 in '06 but will play a waiting game for now.

kuyu
Nov 13, 2005, 01:20 AM
You my friend, need more cowbell.

LOL. I have a shirt that says "more cowbell." Awesome;)

hulugu
Nov 13, 2005, 02:55 AM
Wireless Adapter: $99

This ridiculously overpriced wireless adapter is a REQUIREMENT for me, where ethernet cords don't reach where I have my consoles.

But, you can buy any wireless system. I would suggest the Airport Express that I use with my Xbox, but you don't have to buy the one intended for the Xbox360.

takao
Nov 13, 2005, 03:44 AM
But, you can buy any wireless system. I would suggest the Airport Express that I use with my Xbox, but you don't have to buy the one intended for the Xbox360.

uhm.. the xbox 360 doesn't have built-in wireless... the 99 buck adapter is for the _console_ not for your home network to connect with the console.. perhaps that led to some confusion..

hulugu
Nov 13, 2005, 03:46 AM
uhm.. the xbox 360 doesn't have built-in wireless... the 99 buck adapter is for the _console_ not for your home network to connect with the console.. perhaps that led to some confusion..

?? I am confused, doesn't the Xbox360 come with networking ability?

takao
Nov 13, 2005, 03:53 AM
?? I am confused, doesn't the Xbox360 come with networking ability?

well it has a standard ethernet port .. but wireless for networking is a add-on (remeber: microsoft wants to make money this time around)

mo-ca
Nov 13, 2005, 04:03 AM
but there are some nice devices, that you connect to a normal ethernet port and broadcast youre signal wireless ...

the linksys WGA series for example:

http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=image%2Fjpeg&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3Dwga54ag%252C0.jpg&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1119927803462&ssbinary=true (http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?childpagename=US%2FLayout&packedargs=c%3DL_Product_C2%26cid%3D1115416829491&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper)

that one is connected to my current xbox ...

GFLPraxis
Nov 13, 2005, 10:50 AM
@ hulugu: The XBox 360 is the only next gen console that lacks built in wireless, and the WiFi adapter is $99.

kuyu
Nov 13, 2005, 10:52 AM
@ hulugu: The XBox 360 is the only next gen console that lacks built in wireless, and the WiFi adapter is $99.

Which is $70 too much in everyone (except for M$'s) opinion.

ZorPrime
Nov 13, 2005, 08:07 PM
Yeah, a big gamble. The PS3 will most likely release this spring in Japan but won't hit other markets until next winter. Unlike the Xbox360s worldwide launch. Also, Toshiba is letting Chinese manufacturers build HD-DVD players to saturate the market before BluRay. Link (http://www.ultimateavmag.com/news/110305hddvdchina/) Look for HD-DVD players to start pricing at about $1,000 but drop quickly to around $300 by summer. The PS3 is going to have a battle on two fronts.

I don't mean to be rude by jumping into the conversation but I think from a technological standpoint, Blu-Ray can only enhance the PS3. Many keep speaking of how Blu-Ray is just way too expensive. The initial costs of all new technologies are always expensive. Cost of Blu-Ray is dropping rather quickly. An example is of Dell and other major PC makers planning on shipping BD-Recording drives on their portables and desktops (which aren't going to cost $5k USD) by late Q2 and early Q3 2006, with standalone players starting in spring '06 well under 1k USD. Blu-Ray recordable drives are already available. No HD-DVD recorders, devices, or standalone available yet.

I think swamping the market with cheap HD-DVD players might backfire on Toshiba. The same article strongly suggests owners of content won't like that. Especially given the fact that China is notorious for not being able/willing to enforce intellectual property laws. A huge point of the next-gen DVD is content control and security. China's the last place the movie and gaming content owners are going look for confidence in honoring their property rights. More and more content providers, distributors, and owners are jumping the HD-DVD ship over to Blu-Ray. Warner Brothers and Paramount are now supporting Blu-Ray.