Ps3 vs Revalution vs xbox360

[lushe]

I don't know about you guy's but I think revalution is going to shock the world with there new consle. xbox360 did not do well in japan again.

and the ps3 has a rep for showing things there system can't do

so who takes it

[Aelo]

Uh-Oh. It's 'bout to be a full-scale console-war up out this piece...

[Weetomuncher]

I tip the Atari 2600 all the way.

Between 1976 and 1983 it was the best selling console in the US.

[lushe]

I tip the Atari 2600 all the way.

Between 1976 and 1983 it was the best selling console in the US.for real sweet!

[Aelo]

Can't really argue with the Atari bit there... But seriously, an informed decision can't really be made about the systems until one has played all three of them. Until that time, I'm going to remain neutral on this topic.

[Xero Kaiser]

I don't know about you guy's but I think revalution is going to shock the world with there new consle.

Based off what?

xbox360 did not do well in japan again.

Who cares? It did well everywhere else.

so who takes it

2 of these systems are little more than hype at this point. Maybe when we see an actual screenshot or some games, we can talk

[lushe]

Can't really argue with the Atari bit there... But seriously, an informed decision can't really be made about the systems until one has played all three of them. Until that time, I'm going to remain neutral on this topic. Lets just go by what has been stated about the 3 system and what we have seen on E3.

[da noble savage]

if we go by what's stated then ps3 wins hand's down as for the revalution frankly I don't even think its in the running.

[lushe]

Based off what?



Who cares? It did well everywhere else.



2 of these systems are little more than hype at this point. Maybe when we see an actual screenshot or some games, we can talk based of the fact that the said you will be able to play all nintindo super nintindo and 64 games on it.

and they flat out said that the xbox360 did not meet there standerd of sales and they really wanted japan.

[Lubichev]

I play no favorites. I'm an equal opportunity gamer. I'm glad each of them are/will be fighting for "best console" bragging rights. That just means more kick ass games for me.

[Black Atom]

As usual, Nintendo is kinda off doing their own thing, so its really just between PS3 and 360. This generation of consoles will probably turn out just like the last.

[lushe]

As usual, Nintendo is kinda off doing their own thing, so its really just between PS3 and 360. This generation of consoles will probably turn out just like the last. with sony winniing by a long shoot

[SuperSaiyaMan12]

with sony winniing by a long shoot
Nope, this is the end to the Sony Console Dominance, due to pricing of the PS3. It is estimated to be around 600+ dollars US when it is launched. The Revolution will be around 150-200 dollars, and the graphics won't be noticable, due to the point in gaming realism now.

Overall, I think Nintendo and Microsoft will win this console cycle, and with Sony having to go through a marketing change.

[Black Atom]

Nope, this is the end to the Sony Console Dominance, due to pricing of the PS3. It is estimated to be around 600+ dollars US when it is launched. The Revolution will be around 150-200 dollars, and the graphics won't be noticable, due to the point in gaming realism now.

Overall, I think Nintendo and Microsoft will win this console cycle, and with Sony having to go through a marketing change.

That's what people said about PS2, though. Overpriced and under-performing . In terms of Hardware, it's squashed by the other consoles of it's era and closer to Dreamcast, probably, in capability, only with sh****** load time. Still, it cleaned up because of great publisher support.

[lushe]

That's what people said about PS2, though. Overpriced and under-performing . In terms of Hardware, it's squashed by the other consoles of it's era and closer to Dreamcast, probably, in capability, only with sh****** load time. Still, it cleaned up because of great publisher support.this is true

[Convoy]

That's what people said about PS2, though. Overpriced and under-performing . In terms of Hardware, it's squashed by the other consoles of it's era and closer to Dreamcast, probably, in capability, only with sh****** load time. Still, it cleaned up because of great publisher support.

It also had name recognition. PlayStation is a household name now and for some, that's enough to warrant a purchase. PS3 will probably continue the trend.

[BlairH]

The Revolution will perform -at retail- similarly to their previous efforts, in that they will sell well enough to make Ninty a decent profit, Ninty will support the console with A+ grade first party games. However, there will be next to no third party support.

PS3. Well, PS3 could be a bat marked "Sony" with a piece of string attached to a ball marked "GTA4" and it would sell.

XBOX360 looks as if it will have a superior online community. The console will get loads of third party support (not as much as the PS3 however). It probably will not sell as well as the PS3, that is my gut feeling (however the predicted price point of the PS3 may change this)

[Xero Kaiser]

based of the fact that the said you will be able to play all nintindo super nintindo and 64 games on it.

You can play Nintendo and Super Nintendo games on your PC. Been that way for years. Anyone who gave a crap about an old game emulated it years ago. Yes it's a nice feature but it's not going to sell consoles. Unless you really think people buy new consoles to play old games.

And N64 games? There's like....5 that are worth a damn

That's what people said about PS2, though. Overpriced and under-performing . In terms of Hardware, it's squashed by the other consoles of it's era and closer to Dreamcast, probably, in capability, only with sh****** load time. Still, it cleaned up because of great publisher support.

It also had a nice head start. Which Microsoft would have had if they didn't screw it up so bad. The fact that they wasted consoles on a Japanese launch right now when they've got more orders than they can fill in the US is beyond my ability to understand

[Black Atom]

The Revolution will perform -at retail- similarly to their previous efforts, in that they will sell well enough to make Ninty a decent profit, Ninty will support the console with A+ grade first party games. However, there will be next to no third party support.

PS3. Well, PS3 could be a bat marked "Sony" with a piece of string attached to a ball marked "GTA4" and it would sell.

XBOX360 looks as if it will have a superior online community. The console will get loads of third party support (not as much as the PS3 however). It probably will not sell as well as the PS3, that is my gut feeling (however the predicted price point of the PS3 may change this)

Yeah, I pretty much agree here.

[Black Atom]

You can play Nintendo and Super Nintendo games on your PC. Been that way for years. Anyone who gave a crap about an old game emulated it years ago. Yes it's a nice feature but it's not going to sell consoles. Unless you really think people buy new consoles to play old games.

And N64 games? There's like....5 that are worth a damn

Yeah, this isn't really something to get excited about.


It also had a nice head start. Which Microsoft would have had if they didn't screw it up so bad. The fact that they wasted consoles on a Japanese launch right now when they've got more orders than they can fill in the US is beyond my ability to understand

Yeah this is the other thing. This boofed launch is reeeeeeally going to hurt 360 later this year. All PS3 has to do is come along an knaw at Microsoft's soft underbelly at that point.

[lushe]

You can play Nintendo and Super Nintendo games on your PC. Been that way for years. Anyone who gave a crap about an old game emulated it years ago. Yes it's a nice feature but it's not going to sell consoles. Unless you really think people buy new consoles to play old games.

And N64 games? There's like....5 that are worth a damn



It also had a nice head start. Which Microsoft would have had if they didn't screw it up so bad. The fact that they wasted consoles on a Japanese launch right now when they've got more orders than they can fill in the US is beyond my ability to understandwell right now 360 has the best controler. plus all I was saying was that nintindo seems really comfortable even though the other systems seem to be super.

Also the xbox had the more powerful system the first time, but they still lost in a big way as far as sales

japan hates the xbox

[Xero Kaiser]

japan hates the xbox

Don't they though? I always thought MS should go the route of PC gaming, just focus on the US and Europe and to hell with everyone else. Unless they'd rather waste money and spread their already short supply even thinner.


Which they apparently do

[Convoy]

It's always been tough for a a western company to enter the Japanese market. Japanese gamers are IMO biased when it comes to a console not developed by a native company.

I think even if they lose money in Japan, MS needs their third party support.

[PirateMan]

I think Nintendo gambled BIG on the Revolution. Their 'nunchuck' contoller comes across as little more than a novelty idea. I can't think of many next-gen games that have been announced for the 360 and PS3 that would work well with the Revolution's controller. A lot of game developers might not be willing to revamp their games so that it controls halfway decent with Nintendo's weird-as-fuck controller. That would mean Nintendo would have a hard-ass time trying to get publishers to make a shit-ton of Revolution-exclusive games.

I admire Nintendo's passion about making a console purely for gaming, but I don't think they're even in the running against Microsoft and Sony. Unless their gamble pays off, I really think this could be it for Nintendo. Right now the DS is doing awesome, proving that hardware isn't everything (take that, PSP!!!) but I'm really not sure about the revolution.

[Black Atom]

I think Nintendo gambled BIG on the Revolution. Their 'nunchuck' contoller comes across as little more than a novelty idea. I can't think of many next-gen games that have been announced for the 360 and PS3 that would work well with the Revolution's controller. A lot of game developers might not be willing to revamp their games so that it controls halfway decent with Nintendo's weird-as-fuck controller. That would mean Nintendo would have a hard-ass time trying to get publishers to make a shit-ton of Revolution-exclusive games.

I admire Nintendo's passion about making a console purely for gaming, but I don't think they're even in the running against Microsoft and Sony. Unless their gamble pays off, I really think this could be it for Nintendo. Right now the DS is doing awesome, proving that hardware isn't everything (take that, PSP!!!) but I'm really not sure about the revolution.

I was kinda wary of the Revolution myself, but I felt the same about the DS (how the heck will that work) but it turned out pretty awesome. Nintendo, as usual, is playing their own game. When all the dust is settled, they'll still have their core fan base as well as their core third party guys. I'm betting the big dogs like Capcom and Sega will jump at the chance to produce some games for the Rev.

[Jabuka]

Well in my form of opinon is whats best is gonna be for two reasons
1.300-800$ what the He**!!(sorry sony but I dont wanna live in a box)
2.im still having memorys of how many "disc read errors" have happend with my pS2 that and load times.
then its down to revoulution to Xbox 360
which i'll have to see revolution to vote on that burt revolution looks like it has quite some potential especially in games like the legend of zelda (im a left handed lucky me for once :D )

[Gargus]

I will say this.....WHO CARES ABOUT THE SYSTEM?!

Who cars who sells the most systems? Has the best graphics? The coolest looking system?

If the games on it suck then the system isnt worth a crap.

Anyone who is all about the system itself or is a fanboy to a company is a fool and you are not a real gamer. Your just someone who likes to argue on the internet about stupid things.

I mean if you take the body of a bmw and put ford pinto guts under it may look nice but its still a POS.

I care about the games, not what they run on. Hell the turbografx 16 has better games than what is out for xbox and xbox 360 and its hardware is inferior. And no system has a larger selection of good games than the nes or snes.

[Xero Kaiser]

When the hell did the T16 ever have good games (other than Bonk)?

The rest of your arguement kinda came outta nowhere

[PirateMan]

I mean if you take the body of a bmw and put ford pinto guts under it may look nice but its still a POS.


That's like saying you take the casing of a 360 and place the insides of a Virtua Boy in it. Your analogy had nothing to do with games.


And besides, what games are considered good is all up to the gamer, not the system.

[Alex]

Xbox 360 wins because it's the only one anyone has played.
Prediction: Playstation 5 will be far better then Xbox 360 and Revolution.

[Xero Kaiser]

Xbox 1080 > Playstation 5 Yew n00b

[Convoy]

You may have to wait for that PS3.

Sony admits PS3 delay possible
Issues with mass production of Blu-ray drives could be to blame if spring system launch is pushed back to fall.

In recent weeks, speculation that Sony would not make its previously announced spring 2006 release date for the PlayStation 3 has grown after a Merrill Lynch report predicted the new console would be pushed back until the end of the year, or perhaps later. Japanese site Sankei Web is reporting that Sony has acknowledged the possibility of a delay in the system, and that such a delay would be due to problems with the mass production of the console's built-in Blu-ray drive.

A Sony spokesperson is quoted in the article as saying, "The highest quality picture is vital to the PS3. There is a possibility of delay [to the launch] if delivery of parts is delayed."

The article suggests that if Sony does delay the system, that it would put the launch off until after October in order to hit the busy holiday season. It also quotes Enterbrain president Hiokazu Hamamura as saying that if Sony hasn't started taking orders for the system by now, it would be difficult for the company to launch the PS3 in May.
By Brendan Sinclair -- GameSpot
Posted Feb 27, 2006 2:29 pm PT

[Taltos]

edit: double post

[Taltos]

The PS3 will dominate the world, with the Revolution coming up behind it.

[MKTerra]

I've been leaning toward the Revo for a while now. At the rate things are going though, it looks like MS just might eat Sony's lunch. I swear MS has a real-life jobber aura...

[Xero Kaiser]

I swear MS has a real-life jobber aura...

They do. It's called Xbox Live and money. They'll never go down as long as that holds out

[Black Atom]

Sony has the jobber aura. X-Box should've utterly stomped PS2.

[Phrozen]

No way I am getting a PS3. Sony proved to me with the Disc Read Error on their 3rd and fourth generation PS2s that they don't give a crap about hardware quality. Therefore I am not going to be buying a PS3.

[MKTerra]

They do. It's called Xbox Live and money. They'll never go down as long as that holds outI think you're right about the money, at least :p But I'm thinking of MS's performance in other markets, too...

Re: OS's, Mac and Linux are arguably superior technology, but Apple clings to its premium hardware niche, and Open Source is all factionalized by its very nature.

Re: Office suites, I can't speak for WordPerfect, but OpenOffice is slow in performance and development, and KOffice is still a long ways off from coming to Windows.

Re: Government, MS has largely escaped punishment for abuses of its monopoly.

Well, at least there's a fire under their butt in the browser arena. Here's hoping it stays lit.

Sony has the jobber aura. X-Box should've utterly stomped PS2.Oh really? How did that go down?

[Urusai Wrangler]

Here's some more info on why the PS3 might be seeing more delays:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060225-6265.html
http://gear.ign.com/articles/691/691408p1.html

[cactusmaac]

God knows why Sony made the move to make PS3 a Blu-Ray device.

They did well when PS2 came out since lots of people bought them to also get (at the time) a cheap DVD player, but I can't think of that many gamers - casual or hardcore - who really, really want a games machine that specifically plays Blu-Ray DVDs.

The high price point is going to hurt them far more than Blu-Ray compatibility will help them. Especially if the average punter can't see much visual difference between X-Box 360 and PS3 games (and there won't be much).

[cable guy]

Nope, this is the end to the Sony Console Dominance, due to pricing of the PS3. It is estimated to be around 600+ dollars US when it is launched. The Revolution will be around 150-200 dollars, and the graphics won't be noticable, due to the point in gaming realism now.

Overall, I think Nintendo and Microsoft will win this console cycle, and with Sony having to go through a marketing change.

If PS3 cost's $600. or more, it will lose.

I have always gone with Playstation, that much money will probably turn me off.

[Black Atom]

Oh really? How did that go down?

Hardware-wise, X-box is superior in every way. Not just graphics/processor etc, but innovations like the harddrive, Live etc. Only thing PS2 really had on it was developer support.

[Xero Kaiser]

Makes me sad to see a system go unused like that. Imagine what GTA could have been if it had been built ground-up for the Xbox. God of War's one of the best games I've ever played but if you look at the concept art they constantly mention how they didn't have enough power/memory to add certain things since they were working with a PS2.

Why willingly hamstring yourself? Well, I know the answer...but still....

[cactusmaac]

BTW, Merrill Lynch are estimating it will cost Sony $800 to build each PS3.

Looks like Sony will be limiting launch - and then supply - until the costs of parts drops.

Maybe they should rename it the Spruce Goose, as Engadget remarks.

http://rsch1.ml.com/9093/24013/ds/276873_0.PDF

[lushe]

They do. It's called Xbox Live and money. They'll never go down as long as that holds out i just found out that sony plans to cruch MS in the online bout seeing how they failed with the ps2.

I read that the PS3 online system will have everything MS but better. I couldn't really understand all the science talk and numbers but I will try to post it for you guys

[Mike Pothier]

You can play Nintendo and Super Nintendo games on your PC. Been that way for years. Anyone who gave a crap about an old game emulated it years ago. Yes it's a nice feature but it's not going to sell consoles. Unless you really think people buy new consoles to play old games.

And N64 games? There's like....5 that are worth a damn

The fact that emulation is huge online and that collections like Megaman and Sonic have been selling through the rooftop points to the interest in old games. I think its an extremely strong selling point. But if you're worried about new games, there is a lot of talk amongst the third party developers on Revolution support. Only time will tell if any of it pans out, though.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

However, there will be next to no third party support.

theres no way of knowing this at this point.me my self i'll purchase the revolution first,then the ps3 a year or 2 l8ter.and after that MAYBE the 360.

[Urusai Wrangler]

i just found out that sony plans to cruch MS in the online bout seeing how they failed with the ps2.

I read that the PS3 online system will have everything MS but better. I couldn't really understand all the science talk and numbers but I will try to post it for you guys

They may plan to crush LIVE, but I doubt it'll happen any time soon. MS has had years of networking experience whereas Sony has next to none. I'll be utterly amazed if Sony can pull off a superior service to LIVE by the time the PS3 launches, although given the numerous delays of the launch, they may have plenty of time to work on it.

My money says that by the time the PS3 launches, the 360 and Revolution will be far cheaper and be just as good within a fair margin.

[cactusmaac]

theres no way of knowing this at this point.me my self i'll purchase the revolution first,then the ps3 a year or 2 l8ter.and after that MAYBE the 360.

You'd be best off buying the PS3 last since it'll stay the most expensive console for a good while to come.

Software prices will also be jacked up for the PS3 since Sony will need to make up the big losses it'll be making on hardware sales.

[Xero Kaiser]

theres no way of knowing this at this point.

It's a pretty safe bet. Nintendo's last 2 consoles suffered from a lack of 3rd party support and the revolution has the added complication of an akward controller that really isn't suited for a lot of games out there

[Mike Pothier]

It's a pretty safe bet. Nintendo's last 2 consoles suffered from a lack of 3rd party support and the revolution has the added complication of an akward controller that really isn't suited for a lot of games out there

On the flip side, though, Nintendo is making the Revolution very attractive to smaller third party developers. The ones that can't afford the skyrocketing development costs without selling 10 million copies of their games, which isn't gonna happen. If the Revolution can make developing that much easier, then profiting won't be as hard.

But like I said, only time will tell.

[lushe]

It's a pretty safe bet. Nintendo's last 2 consoles suffered from a lack of 3rd party support and the revolution has the added complication of an akward controller that really isn't suited for a lot of games out there didn't resident evil 4 out sold halo 2? i'm pretty sure it did I remeber seeing that halo 2 broke records on first day sales but over all wasn't that great compared to sqaurenix final fantasys and resident evil 4

[cactusmaac]

RE4 sold 5 million units across all formats.

Halo 2 sold 7 million for the X-Box alone last time I checked.

[lushe]

RE4 sold 5 million units across all formats.

Halo 2 sold 7 million for the X-Box alone last time I checked. I read RE4 sold around 16mill on all formats.

where did you get your info from

RE4 was named game of the year

[Black Atom]

I read RE4 sold around 16mill on all formats.

where did you get your info from

RE4 was named game of the year

Maybe that's including Japan?

[BlairH]

theres no way of knowing this at this point.
Actually, it's all in Nintendos company policy and business model. Third Parties -to them- aren't as important as in house development so it's more than an assumption to state that the Rev will lack third party support, it's almost part of their strategy.

[Xero Kaiser]

I read RE4 sold around 16mill on all formats.

Unless it sold an additional 15 million copies in under a year (which it didn't), I'd say you heard wrong. The game didn't even break the 1 million mark until last May. There's no way the numbers just skyrocketed like that

RE4 was named game of the year

By who? There's a million of those awards and none of them really matter

[Black Atom]

Actually, it's all in Nintendos company policy and business model. Third Parties -to them- aren't as important as in house development so it's more than an assumption to state that the Rev will lack third party support, it's almost part of their strategy.

Nintendo's the only company that has serious in-house development anymore, so they aren't as dependent on third-parties as PS and X-Box are, but they'll still have the bigger names like Capcom, Konami and Sega. During the E3 presentation, they'd already released Rev demos to those companies so they could start kicking around ideas.

[lushe]

Unless it sold an additional 15 million copies in under a year (which it didn't), I'd say you heard wrong. The game didn't even break the 1 million mark until last May. There's no way the numbers just skyrocketed like that



By who? There's a million of those awards and none of them really matter

If I knew how to post scans I would show you.

it said 16million copys world wide on ps2 and gamecube

Uh halo 2 sold like 1.5million in the first weak

so yeah I could see that happening in a year

[Xero Kaiser]

RE4 wasn't even one of the top 20 selling games at any point past april. The type of sales that you're suggesting would've made it the fastest, and one of the best selling games ever. But it took half a year for it to break half a million sales in the US (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6127089.html?q=resident%20evil%204). So where'd those other 15.5 million sales come from? Capcom's only shipped 3 million copies (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6143897.html?q=resident%20evil%204) of the game

[Convoy]

If I knew how to post scans I would show you.

it said 16million copys world wide on ps2 and gamecube

Uh halo 2 sold like 1.5million in the first weak

so yeah I could see that happening in a year

The RE franchise has sold a worldwide total of 26+million copies. (http://games.ign.com/articles/622/622598p1.html)

According to MS (believe them or not), Halo 2 sold 5 million a month after launching. (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/12/03/news_6114396.html)

[Black Atom]

You know, I've been seeing the commercials for Fight Night on the 360 and can't help but be overwhelmed by how...goofy it looked. Seriously, it had that "almost there, but disturbingly off" feel of bad CG and brought up horrifying flashbacks to Polar Express trailers. Just now, I was checking out the Superman Returns trailer someone posted on the film boards and it suffered from the same thing. It was cool to see Supes up against a giant robot but I couldn't help but be distracted by the stuff that just didn't look right. If this is what we have to look forward to from this generation of games, then I'm scared as hell.

Hopefully other games will follow the example of Perfect Dark Zero or DOA4, which were smart not to base their human models on hardcore reality and stylized them a bit. The results otherwise are just bad (again, compare Polar Express to Advent Children, which took a more stylized approach). I'd even like to see some new takes on cell-shading this time around.

[Phrozen]

RE4 was named game of the year

It really shouldn't have. I was less then impressed with it.

[blackdragon6]

It really shouldn't have. I was less then impressed with it.
your one of verry few.........


as far as the revolution goes,the only thing that matters is that they got support from kanomi,and capcom.but other than that nintendo honestly has what it needs.and i HIGHLY doubt that weired controller will be the standard for the system.........i mean really people.

[SAMAS]

Makes me sad to see a system go unused like that. Imagine what GTA could have been if it had been built ground-up for the Xbox. God of War's one of the best games I've ever played but if you look at the concept art they constantly mention how they didn't have enough power/memory to add certain things since they were working with a PS2.

Why willingly hamstring yourself? Well, I know the answer...but still....
Granted, though. God of War had absolutely no chance of being made for the X-box at all, considering it was made first-party by SCEA.

[SAMAS]

You know, I've been seeing the commercials for Fight Night on the 360 and can't help but be overwhelmed by how...goofy it looked. Seriously, it had that "almost there, but disturbingly off" feel of bad CG and brought up horrifying flashbacks to Polar Express trailers. Just now, I was checking out the Superman Returns trailer someone posted on the film boards and it suffered from the same thing. It was cool to see Supes up against a giant robot but I couldn't help but be distracted by the stuff that just didn't look right. If this is what we have to look forward to from this generation of games, then I'm scared as hell.

Hopefully other games will follow the example of Perfect Dark Zero or DOA4, which were smart not to base their human models on hardcore reality and stylized them a bit. The results otherwise are just bad (again, compare Polar Express to Advent Children, which took a more stylized approach). I'd even like to see some new takes on cell-shading this time around.

You know, I never felt that way about Polar Express or TSW. I guess I'm immune to the Uncanny Valley.

[Xero Kaiser]

You know, I've been seeing the commercials for Fight Night on the 360 and can't help but be overwhelmed by how...goofy it looked.

I don't really see anything overly goofy (http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/016/930863_20060117_screen004.jpg) about it. 0_o

Hopefully other games will follow the example of Perfect Dark Zero or DOA4, which were smart not to base their human models on hardcore reality and stylized them a bit.

PDZ looked and animated like garbage. You don't want games following it's footsteps. Some games can get away with stylized graphics more than others, though. I don't want cel-shading or big eyes in my Splinter Cell games

Granted, though. God of War had absolutely no chance of being made for the X-box at all, considering it was made first-party by SCEA.

Argh, I keep forgetting that.

[MKTerra]

your one of verry few.........


as far as the revolution goes,the only thing that matters is that they got support from kanomi,and capcom.but other than that nintendo honestly has what it needs.and i HIGHLY doubt that weired controller will be the standard for the system.........i mean really people.Last I heard, the Revo will be shipping with the stick controller. GameCube controllers will work with the Revo too, though.

[Black Atom]

You know, I never felt that way about Polar Express or TSW. I guess I'm immune to the Uncanny Valley.

I'm not sure I get your reference.

[Black Atom]

I don't really see anything overly goofy (http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/016/930863_20060117_screen004.jpg) about it. 0_o.

The stills look great but the models move somewhat stiffly and unrealistically. At least to me they do.


PDZ looked and animated like garbage. You don't want games following it's footsteps. Some games can get away with stylized graphics more than others, though. I don't want cel-shading or big eyes in my Splinter Cell games.

Agreed on PDZ, but I'm talking about the designs more than anything else. The animation in that game is inexplicably terrible.

[DHX]

The stills look great but the models move somewhat stiffly and unrealistically. At least to me they do.



Agreed on PDZ, but I'm talking about the designs more than anything else. The animation in that game is inexplicably terrible.


its rare.

without the guys who made it good

nobody should be suprised

[Xero Kaiser]

The stills look great but the models move somewhat stiffly and unrealistically. At least to me they do.


The only thing that really bothers me is how certain animations (like parries or haymakers) seem to happen in slow motion. That and they need to touch up some of the KO animations so they don't randomly bounce around sometimes.

The animation in that game is inexplicably terrible

Death animations in particular.

[Black Atom]

I heard that both Kameo and PDZ were meant for last generation consoles, which still doesn't excuse how laughably bad the animations are.

The death animations combined with the (intentionally?) hilarious grunting noises during melee attacks actually kept me in stitches the whole game. I'd almost count that toward the game's overall enjoyment. Almost.

[Xero Kaiser]

Yeah, I think Kameo went through 2 or 3 generations. I saw some comparison shots a while back, but I have no idea where to find them now

[SAMAS]

I'm not sure I get your reference.

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

[Astonishing X-Fan]

Kameo and Fight Night are BEAUTIFUL games. FACT. Anyone who says otherwise can't have played the full games in HD.

[Alex]

Kameo and Fight Night are BEAUTIFUL games. FACT. Anyone who says otherwise can't have played the full games in HD.
I haven't played them in HD, because i don't know anyone who has an HD TV, but i still think those two are very pretty.

[Black Atom]

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

Interesting, I'd not heard of that before but it describes exactly how I feel watching Fight Night.

[Lubichev]

I haven't played them in HD, because i don't know anyone who has an HD TV, but i still think those two are very pretty.
It is like night and day. If you think they look pretty now....................

[BlairH]

I haven't played them in HD, because i don't know anyone who has an HD TV, but i still think those two are very pretty.

I've found that the best and cheapest way to get HD is to buy the VGA cable and hook it up to a computer monitor, and use the optical output on the back of the AV adapter to plug it into your computer's sound system. Easy as pie (depending on the inputs on your sound system of course)

I've actually got a few HD displays in the house (projector, TV etc) but the monitor is more convinient because it's near my router, and I'm way too cheap to buy the 360 wireless adaptor.

[BlairH]

It is like night and day. If you think they look pretty now....................
Agreed. There's virtually no comparison.

[madevil]

I said it to a friend and Ill repeat this now:

When PS1 came out... what was it?

The S***

When PS2 came out, what was it?

That's right... the S***!

When PS3 comes out, guess what.....

[Urusai Wrangler]

When PS2 came out, what was it?

That's right... the S***!


Actually, I recall only one game worth playing at the PS2's launch (SSX), and graphics that were only marginally better than the Dreamcast. The PS2 didn't impress me until almost a year later when Twisted Metal Black was released.

[BlairH]

Actually, I recall only one game worth playing at the PS2's launch (SSX), and graphics that were only marginally better than the Dreamcast. The PS2 didn't impress me until almost a year later when Twisted Metal Black was released.
Indeed, at least the XBox had Halo, and the Gamecube had Rogue Leader at launch. PS2 had...SSX, a game that nobody would really consider playing now.

As for the thread title: XBox360 wins. Why? Because it's out now. The other 2 are vapourware untill I see a solid release date.

[Lubichev]

The game that has defined the X360 so far............
Ghost Recon:Advanced Warfighter. What an absolutely awesome game.

[BlairH]

The game that has defined the X360 so far............
Ghost Recon:Advanced Warfighter. What an absolutely awesome game.

Yup. 7 hours of my life I'll never forget.

[Taltos]

I said it to a friend and Ill repeat this now:

When PS1 came out... what was it?

The S***

When PS2 came out, what was it?

That's right... the S***!

When PS3 comes out, guess what.....
NES: The S***!
SNES: The S***!
N64: The S***!
Gamecube: well

Things change buddy.

[Black Atom]

NES: The S***!
SNES: The S***!
N64: The S***!
Gamecube: well

Things change buddy.

I thought the Cube was much better than the '64, actually.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

I thought the Cube was much better than the '64, actually.
lol co-sign...

[Lubichev]

Yup. 7 hours of my life I'll never forget.
Are you saying you've beaten it, already? Or that you spent 7 hours on the game in one sitting?


I've yet to experience the absolute wonderfullness of online play.

[BlairH]

Are you saying you've beaten it, already? Or that you spent 7 hours on the game in one sitting?


I've yet to experience the absolute wonderfullness of online play.
Beaten it already. 7 Hours 10 minutes. It's a VERY short campaign.

The online mode is wonderful!

[Lubichev]

Beaten it already. 7 Hours 10 minutes. It's a VERY short campaign.

The online mode is wonderful!
:( for short campaign news.
:) :) for online goodness news.

how many achievement points to you get for beating the campaign? (I'm becoming a sucker for Achievement Points.)

[BlairH]

:( for short campaign news.
I wouldn't worry. At least the game doesn't outlive it's welcome. It's a blast while it lasts (and may even hold some replay value)

how many achievement points to you get for beating the campaign? (I'm becoming a sucker for Achievement Points.)
I honestly don't know. I didn't notice. I don't even know how many achievement points I have in total.

[Taltos]

I thought the Cube was much better than the '64, actually.
Oh, i totally agree. But when the 64 came out it was considered "the S***!" Gamecube was never considered "the S***!" by the majority of the gaming world.

[Xero Kaiser]

But when the 64 came out it was considered "the S***!"

No it wasn't, that's why it sold like crap. Any thunder the system did have was quickly stolen by FF7

[nervmeister]

No it wasn't, that's why it sold like crap. Any thunder the system did have was quickly stolen by FF7And 64 responded with Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

[Xero Kaiser]

As good as that was, it didn't have nearly the same impact

[Tadhg]

As for the thread title: XBox360 wins. Why? Because it's out now. The other 2 are vapourware untill I see a solid release date.

That's because you kids today like to use the term incorrectly.

[Black Atom]

By the time the 64 was launched, the line in the sand had already been drawn. That is, Sony had already taken the VG industry away from kids. So it's not like Nintendo was ever competing with Sony, they were (and still are) going for a totally different market. Same with Gamecube. People either supported it no matter what PS was doing, or they had both. The only reason 64 didn't do better, IMO, is because...well...it sucked.

[BlairH]

That's because you kids today like to use the term incorrectly.

Kid? Kid?
Hey man, I'll be 20 in September. I'm not exactly a spring chicken anymore.


(cries at thought of turning 20)

[Xero Kaiser]

Kid? Kid?
Hey man, I'll be 20 in September. I'm not exactly a spring chicken anymore.


Yes you are, young'un

[blackdragon6]

As good as that was, it didn't have nearly the same impact
LOL wow i completly dissagree....

[Kid Kamikaze10]

As good as that was, it didn't have nearly the same impact

As much as I love FFVII, I have to disagree. Zelda: Orcarina of Time was one of the greatest games ever made. I think they are just about equal.

FFVII = Z: OoT < Terranimga < Chrono Trigger!

In my opinion.

[Xero Kaiser]

LOL wow i completly dissagree....

As much as I love FFVII, I have to disagree. Zelda: Orcarina of Time was one of the greatest games ever made. I think they are just about equal.

This isn't about what game you prefer. I'm talking about the impact FF7 made on the market. It the RPG which pretty much single-handedly gave the RPG genre a huge kick in the ass, especially in America, where RPGs were barely trickling in before that.

You gonna tell me OoT had that kind of impact? Not even close

[Kid Kamikaze10]

This isn't about what game you prefer. I'm talking about the impact FF7 made on the market. It the RPG which pretty much single-handedly gave the RPG genre a huge kick in the ass, especially in America, where RPGs were barely trickling in before that.

You gonna tell me OoT had that kind of impact? Not even close

Zelda's one of the only reasons why Nintendo is still around. Well, that and their fanbase.

[Kid Kamikaze10]

I mean, did you see how bad GC did without Zelda last year? It wasn't very good.

[Xero Kaiser]

I mean, did you see how bad GC did without Zelda last year? It wasn't very good.

All that proves is the fact that the GC had a pretty sorry lineup overall. There's a lot more to it than a lack of Zelda

[Voncaster]

Well I'm strickly old school when it comes to video games. New games are all the same to me. They fall into one of 3 catagories.

1. First person shooter types (my least favorite genre in the world)
2. RPG Spanning 400+ hours of gameplay (too bad there isn't 72 hours in a day)
3. Some type of Sports simulator (Driving or Football primarily)

Seriously I hate the video games today. Its all flash and no content. I'll take rampage, super mario bros, paper boy, rampart and whole host of old games over the new crop of video games any day.

I'll be getting the Revolution for the massive back catalog of NES games. I also think Nintendo has more inovative multiplayer games and hasn't abandoned the concept of mulitplayer offline. Its a risky stance I know, but I some gamers do have real life friends that can benefit from offline multiplayer games.

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Well I'm strickly old school when it comes to video games. New games are all the same to me. They fall into one of 3 catagories.

1. First person shooter types (my least favorite genre in the world)
2. RPG Spanning 400+ hours of gameplay (too bad there isn't 72 hours in a day)
3. Some type of Sports simulator (Driving or Football primarily)

Seriously I hate the video games today. Its all flash and no content. I'll take rampage, super mario bros, paper boy, rampart and whole host of old games over the new crop of video games any day.

I'll be getting the Revolution for the massive back catalog of NES games. I also think Nintendo has more inovative multiplayer games and hasn't abandoned the concept of mulitplayer offline. Its a risky stance I know, but I some gamers do have real life friends that can benefit from offline multiplayer games.

Play either Viewtiful Joe or God of War. Then you will change your mind about hating new games, or you have a nostalgia problem.

And the multiplayer thing, nobody has abandoned offline multiplayer. I mean, it's still an option in many games today. But these days, there is ALSO online multiplayer, where you can face people from around the world.

Not to jump on you or anything, but those were two bias and baseless comments. There are still very innovative games out there. You just need to search hard enough to find them.

[Mike Pothier]

I have to say that, as great as OoT was, FF7 definitely had a bigger impact on the industry. In terms of pure influence, I'd say the three biggest games of last gen were, in descending order:
1. Super Mario 64
2. FF7
3. Zelda: OoT

[Voncaster]

Not to jump on you or anything, but those were two bias and baseless comments. There are still very innovative games out there. You just need to search hard enough to find them.

I'm willing to admit that I probably over simplified today's video game industry in my previous post. But whenever I hear gamer's talking about video games these days it seems to be Halo 3, World of Warcraft or the latest installment of FF.

I realize there are other options out there for me if I don't like those genres, but it seems like the thrust of the industry is make RPGs and FPS, neither of which exite me that much. If thats your thing, thats cool and I respect that. My definition of fun and your definition of fun can be totally different. In general today's video game industry just doesn't exite me as much as it used to.

I can draw parallels with the release of the latest star wars movies. I realize that technically the latest batch of star wars movies is far superior, but they still failed to inspire me the way the old star wars movies did. Its sort of the same with video games today. They are technically more evolved, bigger and in a lot of ways superior to their predecessors, but at the end of the day it comes down to intangibles like fun and inspiration. I tend to take more fun and inspiration from the older games for whatever reason.

I just like the pick up and play appeal of older games. For me personally I think Nintendo attempts to capture that spirit much more than PS or XBOX.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

I have to say that, as great as OoT was, FF7 definitely had a bigger impact on the industry. In terms of pure influence, I'd say the three biggest games of last gen were, in descending order:
1. Super Mario 64
2. FF7
3. Zelda: OoTand 2 of those are nintendo games.lets not forget the huge impact that golden eye had on first person shooters,or the impact M64 had on platformers,or the impact ocarina of time had on action adventure games.

[Xero Kaiser]

Seriously I hate the video games today. Its all flash and no content. I'll take rampage, super mario bros, paper boy, rampart and whole host of old games over the new crop of video games any day

Because games like Rampage were all about substance. 128 levels of smashing buildings again and again with nothing differentiating the levels or characters

Those are the worst examples you could've possibly used if you're trying to make an arguement about content

And why do people act like better graphics automatically means the game's got no content? That has to be the silliest assumption ever. In case you've forgotten, a lot of those older games you put on a pedestal now often had great graphics for their time and it sure as hell didn't make them lesser games.

[Taltos]

This isn't about what game you prefer. I'm talking about the impact FF7 made on the market. It the RPG which pretty much single-handedly gave the RPG genre a huge kick in the ass, especially in America, where RPGs were barely trickling in before that.

You gonna tell me OoT had that kind of impact? Not even close
pssh, pokemon made the RPG work in america not FF7.

[Xero Kaiser]

The whole Pokemon/Tamagachi/Monster Rancher deal was a different thing entirely. I doubt series that got little to no attention in America up until that point like the Tales, Star Ocean, FF games themselves or the sudden flood of console RPGs that came after have anything to do with pokemon-trading

Completely different games, play styles and market (are they even considered the same genre?).

[Taltos]

The whole Pokemon/Tamagachi/Monster Rancher deal was a different thing entirely. I doubt series that got little to no attention in America up until that point like the Tales, Star Ocean, FF games themselves or the sudden flood of console RPGs that came after have anything to do with pokemon-trading

Completely different games, play styles and market (are they even considered the same genre?).
Pokemon is a fullscale "traditional oriented Japanese RPG" (according to ign) and im pretty sure its one of, if not the most popular RPGs of all time. Dont down play Pokemon's influence on the american market.

[Black Atom]

The whole Pokemon/Tamagachi/Monster Rancher deal was a different thing entirely. I doubt series that got little to no attention in America up until that point like the Tales, Star Ocean, FF games themselves or the sudden flood of console RPGs that came after have anything to do with pokemon-trading

Completely different games, play styles and market (are they even considered the same genre?).

You're selling Pokemon short quite a bit. No doubt FF7 was highly influencial, as it got a lot of people playing RPGs for the first time, but, frankly, it was just a very well presented RPG. The Sega Saturn had a crapload of RPGs on it--but none as pretty as FF7. Pokemon used battling/trading to add a whole new level of gameplay to the traditional RPG. Competing against human opponents and "parties" that were infinitely customizeable was a pretty huge deal. Furthermore, Pokemon pretty much started, for good or ill, the whole anime revolution on American TV.

[Xero Kaiser]

No doubt FF7 was highly influencial, as it got a lot of people playing RPGs for the first time,

That's all I said it did :)

The Sega Saturn had a crapload of RPGs on it--but none as pretty as FF7.

Not many of them were being released over here or convinced companies that there was a real market for these games outside of japan, though

Pokemon used battling/trading to add a whole new level of gameplay to the traditional RPG. Competing against human opponents and "parties" that were infinitely customizeable was a pretty huge deal.

It did, I'm just saying that it pretty much went off into it's own genre. None of the things that pokemon presented carried over into other RPGs. Pokemon did have a huge influence on gaming (like I said, it pretty much created a new type of game), it just wasn't the same one FF7 had

[Black Atom]

Well, there was that huge flood of "collector" style RPGs, afterwards, and "collectable card" versions of pre-existing RPGs.

Funny enough, Pokemon and GB did waaaaay more for Nintendo back then than 64 did. I'm not sure what sorta shape they'd be in now if not for that.

[Eagle299]

Nintendo is dooming itself to die in this particular round of the console wars. Their controller design is just a bad idea. It has half the buttons, and therefore, half the uses of the XBox 360 and PS3 controllers. Yes, its going to have downloadable games which will give it a large starting library, but I cannot fathom a way to play Golden Eye, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time or Mario 64 of those controllers.

If Nintendo really wanted to do something innovative, they should have turned the toggles on the Game Cube controller buttons into toggles like the other systems have, and add a touch screen like the DS has. Then they would have a good controller design, that doesn't toss out everything the industry has learned over the past 20 years.

What ever happens between XBox 360 and PS3, Nintendo will not be competing with them. Not because its better, but because it simply cannot measure up.

[Maleficentogre]

that's where you're wrong. if nintendo did what ps3 and 360 were doing they'd lose. they can't compete there. By changing everything up they carve a new niche in the marketplace and stay competitive. Revolution is designed to pick up people that think games are stupid and won't play them.

[Black Atom]

Nintendo isn't worried about competing with Sony and Microsoft. They haven't been for years. As others have mentioned, they have totally different target demographics.

360 and PS3 have effectively snubbed younger audiences altogether with their prices and inclusion of things like HD and Blu-Ray, which kids don't give two shits about. Same with OL play--it's not something a lot of kids are able to take advantage of. But it's not just kids, either--it's anyone that doesn't have stacks of money lying around to re-wire their house to play games.

Nintendo picks up that slack by offering simplicity, games that have new features (such as the DS touch screen or the new Rev controller) but are easy/intuitive to pick up and play. Also, they've traditionally encouraged in-person multiplayer. I think their niche is pretty safe.

This is pretty ironic: "If Nintendo really wanted to do something innovative, they should have turned the toggles on the Game Cube controller buttons into toggles like the other systems have..." Rumor has it, the DS will interface with the Rev wirelessly as a controller, using the touch screen in certain games too.

[Mike Pothier]

Nintendo is dooming itself to die in this particular round of the console wars. Their controller design is just a bad idea. It has half the buttons, and therefore, half the uses of the XBox 360 and PS3 controllers. Yes, its going to have downloadable games which will give it a large starting library, but I cannot fathom a way to play Golden Eye, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time or Mario 64 of those controllers.

The Revolution Controller will have just as many buttons as the others. You're forgetting that its 3D tracking will take care of several buttons plus add on features such as the "nunchuck" will allow for even more options. Its not that difficult to work with.
PLUS, you have the Shell, which will take care of most N64 games.

If Nintendo really wanted to do something innovative, they should have turned the toggles on the Game Cube controller buttons into toggles like the other systems have, and add a touch screen like the DS has. Then they would have a good controller design, that doesn't toss out everything the industry has learned over the past 20 years.

Whats this? If Nintendo really wants to be innovative, they should copy the other systems and do things thats been done already? Is this bizzaro world, or has the definition of "innovative" suddenly changed while I was gone?

What ever happens between XBox 360 and PS3, Nintendo will not be competing with them. Not because its better, but because it simply cannot measure up.

In pure processing power, yes the Revolution has been confirmed to be less capable. But since when has that mattered? The PS2's specs couldn't hold up to the GC and Xbox, but it outperformed both on the market.

[blackdragon6]

actually i think nintendo revo is gonna smoke ps3,not because i think its better.but because the system will be hella cheaper.

[BlairH]

actually i think nintendo revo is gonna smoke ps3,not because i think its better.but because the system will be hella cheaper.

Cheapness didn't save the cube.

[Tadhg]

Cheapness didn't save the cube.

I wasn't aware it needed saving.

[BlairH]

I wasn't aware it needed saving.

A poor choice of words I'll admit, as it did turn quite a hefty profit, and further it did bear witness to several awesome games of the highest possible caliber.

What I meant to say is that it definately didn't "smoke" the PS2 in the same way that BD believes the Revolution will "smoke" the PS3.

[Xero Kaiser]

Funny enough, Pokemon and GB did waaaaay more for Nintendo back then than 64 did. I'm not sure what sorta shape they'd be in now if not for that.

Somebody got rich off that game


In pure processing power, yes the Revolution has been confirmed to be less capable. But since when has that mattered? The PS2's specs couldn't hold up to the GC and Xbox, but it outperformed both on the market.

It also had nearly every 3rd party out there by the balls

[Maleficentogre]

PS3 is not getting smoked by anything. if any system gets "smoked" it will, unfortuately, be the 360. on the nintendo note there's not enough room in the market for 3 consoles all doing the same thing. That's obvious with how gamecube is doing right now in the west and how xbox is doing in Japan.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

Nintendo is safe,but PS3 or X360 is doomed lol,the price tags are gonna hurt them theres no getting around that.nintendo has the edge with affordability lets be realistic.

it's not just kids, either--it's anyone that doesn't have stacks of money lying around to re-wire their house to play games.

my point exactly

[Taltos]

Cheapness didn't save the cube.
The Gamecube was only $50 cheaper, that hardly a big enough difference to capture the majority of gamers. All it meant for peoples budgets was that if you bought the gamecube you could buy one more game, but given the limited nintendo catalouge you would probably still buy less games.

The revolution could be up to $300 cheaper, that will make a big difference for parents and college kids.

[Eagle299]

The Revolution Controller will have just as many buttons as the others. You're forgetting that its 3D tracking will take care of several buttons plus add on features such as the "nunchuck" will allow for even more options. Its not that difficult to work with.
PLUS, you have the Shell, which will take care of most N64 games.



Whats this? If Nintendo really wants to be innovative, they should copy the other systems and do things thats been done already? Is this bizzaro world, or has the definition of "innovative" suddenly changed while I was gone?



In pure processing power, yes the Revolution has been confirmed to be less capable. But since when has that mattered? The PS2's specs couldn't hold up to the GC and Xbox, but it outperformed both on the market.

I didn't mean that the toggles themselves were inovative. That's simply getting them up to where the other systems are in the controller department. The Game Cube's toggles are vastly inferior to the ones on the PS2 and XBox (I know, I own all three). Adding a touch screen is what would make it inovative.

What they are doing is just plain stupid. Making hand motions control the game is just a horrible idea. Am I the only one who remembers the Power Glove? Sneeze during game play, fall into the abyss.

[Taltos]

Nintendo is safe,but PS3 or X360 is doomed lol,the price tags are gonna hurt them theres no getting around that.nintendo has the edge with affordability lets be realistic.


my point exactly
Nintendo is hardly safe, or do you not remember the virtual boy:
http://img.epinions.com/images/opti/fe/ee/gameHardwareClassicConsolesAllNintendo_VirtualBoy-resized200.jpg

[Eagle299]

I wasn't aware it needed saving.

Have you been to a gaming store lately? The game library for the Gamecube isn't a third of what the XBox offers, let alone PS2.

[Maleficentogre]

and the funny part about that is that the virtual boy made more of a profit than Xbox has.

[Black Atom]

I didn't mean that the toggles themselves were inovative. That's simply getting them up to where the other systems are in the controller department. The Game Cube's toggles are vastly inferior to the ones on the PS2 and XBox (I know, I own all three). Adding a touch screen is what would make it inovative..

By and large, the GC's analog sticks are meant to function in the same way as the PS2/Xbox ones, which is why they're designed differently. So yeah, its probably not optimal for FPSs, but GC isn't exactly modeled around that game type.

What they are doing is just plain stupid. Making hand motions control the game is just a horrible idea. Am I the only one who remembers the Power Glove? Sneeze during game play, fall into the abyss.

Believe it or not, I was pretty skeptical about the touch-screen for the DS but it works pretty brilliantly. Hopefully, this will pan out with the same success. I don't think Nintendo would be gambling their whole system on it if it wasn't going to be any better than the Power Glove.

[blackdragon6]

The revolution could be up to $300 cheaper, that will make a big difference for parents and college kids.that was my point,revolution will be nowhere near as exspensive as the other 2 systems.

[Mike Pothier]

I didn't mean that the toggles themselves were inovative. That's simply getting them up to where the other systems are in the controller department. The Game Cube's toggles are vastly inferior to the ones on the PS2 and XBox (I know, I own all three). Adding a touch screen is what would make it inovative.

Okay, I can understand where you're coming from here. You mentioned innovation, but in the same breath talked about conformity. Now, saying the GC's layout is inferior to the competition is pure opinion, so I won't fault you on that. I do disagree, however. Of the three controllers, the GC's felt most natural and fluid. Adding a touch screen might be somewhat innovative, but not nearly as innovative as what they are doing.

What they are doing is just plain stupid. Making hand motions control the game is just a horrible idea. Am I the only one who remembers the Power Glove? Sneeze during game play, fall into the abyss.

The power glove is almost 20 years old, and was used for 2D games. Old technology on the wrong medium. I highly recommend you read impressions written by people who've used the RevCon, such as IGN. The Revolution, if everything goes right, will be an astounding success.

[Eagle299]

By and large, the GC's analog sticks are meant to function in the same way as the PS2/Xbox ones, which is why they're designed differently. So yeah, its probably not optimal for FPSs, but GC isn't exactly modeled around that game type.

They may be meant to, but they fall short of the competition. They're not as responsive, and lack the button fuctions of the toggles on the PS2 and XBox controller.

And it doesn't just limit FPSs. All game types are more limited because a game cube controller just can't do as much as the competition.

Believe it or not, I was pretty skeptical about the touch-screen for the DS but it works pretty brilliantly. Hopefully, this will pan out with the same success. I don't think Nintendo would be gambling their whole system on it if it wasn't going to be any better than the Power Glove.

Oh, I'm sure it is better than the Power Glove. But just because the tech behind it is more advanced does not mean the concept is any better. The Revolution controller, even taking motion sensors into account, still can do only half of what an XBox 360 controller does. This limits game play options severly.

Going for symplicity does not justify this move. If you want simple game play, design a game that uses only the left toggle/directional pad, start, A & B. You don't need to place huge restrictions on the abilities of game designers to make more complex controlls for more complex games for serious gamers. Alienating serious gamers is a marketing strategy that cannot do anything but hurt them in the long run.

And yes, I've know about attachments since the controller design was announced. I still think its a horrible idea. I have to buy extra ascessories just to make my Revolution controller almost do as much as what my 360 controller did when I bought the system.

[Eagle299]

Okay, I can understand where you're coming from here. You mentioned innovation, but in the same breath talked about conformity. Now, saying the GC's layout is inferior to the competition is pure opinion, so I won't fault you on that. I do disagree, however. Of the three controllers, the GC's felt most natural and fluid. Adding a touch screen might be somewhat innovative, but not nearly as innovative as what they are doing.

Its not just oppinion. Its based on the fact that Gamecube has 4 fewer buttons than PS2 or XBox controllers. This limits it. One thing it did do right was shape the buttons differently, making it easy to tell the buttons across by touch. But the benefits of this wear off quickly compared to an XBox controller once I learned the button lay out, which did not take long (I played GC long before I played XBox).

There are reasons why Sony and Microsoft make their controllers the way they do. Those toggles are a technology that have been tried and proven for years. They work. Motion sensor tech, even if it works, is flawed in its very concept. As I pointed out in a previous post, sneeze, mess up your game. Cat wants attention and bats at your hand, mess up your game. Reach for the pause button because you see one of these distractions coming, and mess up your game because moving your thumb moved your whole hand.

The power glove is almost 20 years old, and was used for 2D games. Old technology on the wrong medium. I highly recommend you read impressions written by people who've used the RevCon, such as IGN. The Revolution, if everything goes right, will be an astounding success.

Not IGN, but I have read several oppinions on these controllers. Nothing they have said has persuaded me. What Nintendo is doing limits their system's abilities. Even with attachments. The nunchuck attachment still leaves it with fewer abilities than the existing Gamecube controller. Other attachments, just mean I have to spend extra.

[GremlinClr]

Alienating serious gamers is a marketing strategy that cannot do anything but hurt them in the long run.

I would think a "serious gamer" would be salivating at the new gameplay ideas instead of constantly buying the...exact...same...game...over...and...over from Sony and Microsoft. Interesting.

For example (and this is speculation obviously), let's say you have a game where you wield a sword. In a normal game you would have your basic attack, high attack, low attack, block and special moves. Now imagine with the Rev control you don't need as many buttons because you won't need different buttons for different attacks. You want to stab the guy in the eye? Press the A button and jab him in the eye! You want to sweep his legs? Press the A button and sweep his legs!

With this system button mashers will become a thing of the past. With this system you will have to rely on...wait for it!...skill.

Now if what I just said doesn't excite you at least a little? Congratulations! You're not a "serious gamer". You're someone that wants Microsoft and Sony to spoonfeed you what they believe is "innovation", better graphics and more processing power. Whee for MS and Sony. I'll try to contain my excitement.

[Eagle299]

I would think a "serious gamer" would be salivating at the new gameplay ideas instead of constantly buying the...exact...same...game...over...and...over from Sony and Microsoft. Interesting.

You would have a point if there wasn't also a great deal of variety in what comes out for Sony and Microsoft. Yeah, Dynasty Warriors hasn't had an original thought since the first game, but there are other new types of game coming out constantly for both systems. Far more than what has come out for Nintendo for the past several years.

For example (and this is speculation obviously), let's say you have a game where you wield a sword. In a normal game you would have your basic attack, high attack, low attack, block and special moves. Now imagine with the Rev control you don't need as many buttons because you won't need different buttons for different attacks. You want to stab the guy in the eye? Press the A button and jab him in the eye! You want to sweep his legs? Press the A button and sweep his legs!

And how am I supposed to side step the attack of the guy I'm dueling? With the controller the Revolution is giving me, I'm a stationary target.

With this system button mashers will become a thing of the past. With this system you will have to rely on...wait for it!...skill.

Current games require skill to play (if they're any good). I can button mash all I want in DOA4. Someone with even a tiny amount of skill at the game is going to walk all over me. What you're suggesting really does not require anymore skill than pulling off a complex combo in a fighting game, or an precise sniper shot in a FPS. It simply involves hand gestures which can be off set by the tiniest things.

Now if what I just said doesn't excite you at least a little? Congratulations! You're not a "serious gamer". You're someone that wants Microsoft and Sony to spoonfeed you what they believe is "innovation", better graphics and more processing power. Whee for MS and Sony. I'll try to contain my excitement.

I typically invest hundreds of hours into RPGs. I've logged at least dozens of hours into playing Halo 2 on XBox Live and far more into LAN parties with the first Halo. If I'm not a serious gamer, then the definition would have to be someone who has no job or school and sits in their parent's basement for 16 hours a day playing non stop.

I had considered the possiblity of such a sword fighting game long before you mentioned it. No matter how many times I go through the possiblities in my head, the downsides always drown them out completely. I may be completely wrong, but a life time of playing video games tells me that I am not. Nintendo is making a mistake, and this time it is going to really hurt them.

[Xero Kaiser]

For example (and this is speculation obviously), let's say you have a game where you wield a sword. In a normal game you would have your basic attack, high attack, low attack, block and special moves. Now imagine with the Rev control you don't need as many buttons because you won't need different buttons for different attacks. You want to stab the guy in the eye? Press the A button and jab him in the eye! You want to sweep his legs? Press the A button and sweep his legs!


There is already a game like that in arcades (which was terrible, by the way). Several actually, it's not as new and exciting as you'd have people believe. Hell, there was an old PC game called "Die by the Sword" which does exactly what you're describing, except with a mouse instead of a controller. Even the Eye-toy did this to some degree.

With this system button mashers will become a thing of the past. With this system you will have to rely on...wait for it!...skill.


Instead of button mashers, we'll have arm-flailers. Yay?

And games now don't require skill? If there was some way I could laugh in your face right now, I'd be doing it

Now if what I just said doesn't excite you at least a little? Congratulations! You're not a "serious gamer".

You didn't say anything new. You show us anything that isn't out there already. And nobody has to live up to whatever random standards you pull out of thin air to be a serious gamer

[Black Atom]

Oh, I'm sure it is better than the Power Glove. But just because the tech behind it is more advanced does not mean the concept is any better. .

See, here's where we disagree. I thought the Power Glove was an excellent idea, if perhaps not executed in the best way. Same with the blaster, super-scope and R.O.B.

The Revolution controller, even taking motion sensors into account, still can do only half of what an XBox 360 controller does. This limits game play options severly.

You seem unable to appreciate the scope of possibilities this will have. Imagine a version of Halo in which you can look/aim just by moving your arm. Not only is that more intuitive, but it eliminates the use of your left hand entirely so you don't need tons of buttons. Or would you prefer to keep playing the same X-box controller?

[mistervader]

See, here's where we disagree. I thought the Power Glove was an excellent idea, if perhaps not executed in the best way. Same with the blaster, super-scope and R.O.B.



You seem unable to appreciate the scope of possibilities this will have. Imagine a version of Halo in which you can look/aim just by moving your arm. Not only is that more intuitive, but it eliminates the use of your left hand entirely so you don't need tons of buttons. Or would you prefer to keep playing the same X-box controller?
Personally, I'd like the option for an either/or.

That being said, if the Revolution included a standard controller and their revolutionary controller, that'd be perfect.

[Eagle299]

See, here's where we disagree. I thought the Power Glove was an excellent idea, if perhaps not executed in the best way. Same with the blaster, super-scope and R.O.B.



You seem unable to appreciate the scope of possibilities this will have. Imagine a version of Halo in which you can look/aim just by moving your arm. Not only is that more intuitive, but it eliminates the use of your left hand entirely so you don't need tons of buttons. Or would you prefer to keep playing the same X-box controller?

I think you're underestimating just how much that left hand does in games. Playing a game like Halo requires both hands. Left to use gernades and left handed weapons and manuver to avoid enemy fire. Right jumps, reloads, switches weapons, picks up new weapons, fires, aims, zooms. Given the limited functionality of the Revolution controller, I could not do half these things. Hand gestures would allow me to move or aim. Not both. Even with the motion sensitivity, the Revolution Controller is 2 steps back.

And if you've ever played Halo, then you know, if you can't move and shoot at the same time, you're a target. Anyone with a Sniper Rifle, be it a Jackal NPC or some kid who just got home from school, will kill you.

So I would greatly prefer the controller that gives me far more options. The XBox 360 controller.

[Eagle299]

Personally, I'd like the option for an either/or.

That being said, if the Revolution included a standard controller and their revolutionary controller, that'd be perfect.

Now that would actually be a good idea. As we were talking about this subject last night, my brother suggested as much. This would kill all of my doubts completely. There would be a means to play all traditional games, and give Nintendo room to develope Mario Fishing.

[Black Atom]

I think you're underestimating just how much that left hand does in games. Playing a game like Halo requires both hands. Left to use gernades and left handed weapons and manuver to avoid enemy fire. Right jumps, reloads, switches weapons, picks up new weapons, fires, aims, zooms. Given the limited functionality of the Revolution controller, I could not do half these things. Hand gestures would allow me to move or aim. Not both. Even with the motion sensitivity, the Revolution Controller is 2 steps back.

And if you've ever played Halo, then you know, if you can't move and shoot at the same time, you're a target. Anyone with a Sniper Rifle, be it a Jackal NPC or some kid who just got home from school, will kill you.

So I would greatly prefer the controller that gives me far more options. The XBox 360 controller.

More buttons = more buttons, not more options. Adding infinitely more buttons does not, and has not, led to better gaming.

[Eagle299]

More buttons = more buttons, not more options. Adding infinitely more buttons does not, and has not, led to better gaming.

Oh, so I had as many options on an old NES controller as I did on the SNES controller? More buttons means more commands I can issue to my character in any game. Therefore, more options available to me when I play.

[Black Atom]

Oh, so I had as many options on an old NES controller as I did on the SNES controller? More buttons means more commands I can issue to my character in any game. Therefore, more options available to me when I play.

And how many buttons do you think they can put on controllers until they start becoming utterly superfluous? People only have so many fingers, after all. Sooner or later, someone was bound to come up with a different way of controlling what happens on-screen to give players new play mechanics to work with and take the industry a step further. Not surprisingly, it happened to be Nintendo.

But you like what you like. From the way you talk, it sounds like you're not in the market Nintendo's going for anyway. But I believe you're mistaken to say Nintendo changing their controller is a "big mistake". They've carved their niche by providing a different experience from X-box and PS. If they tried to dupe them, that would be a mistake.

[Eagle299]

And how many buttons do you think they can put on controllers until they start becoming utterly superfluous? People only have so many fingers, after all. Sooner or later, someone was bound to come up with a different way of controlling what happens on-screen to give players new play mechanics to work with and take the industry a step further. Not surprisingly, it happened to be Nintendo.

Actually, the number XBox and PS2 have now is good. Only other addition I could think of would be to put a couple buttons under the handles. That would make things like jumping and reloading in FPSs easier, since it would eliminate the need to take one's finger off of the right thumb stick. But that's really not necessary.

The problem here is, the way they have chosen to go with this little experiment is flawed to begin with (do I need to list more things that can go wrong during game play) and limits the player's ability to imput commands.

But you like what you like. From the way you talk, it sounds like you're not in the market Nintendo's going for anyway. But I believe you're mistaken to say Nintendo changing their controller is a "big mistake". They've carved their niche by providing a different experience from X-box and PS. If they tried to dupe them, that would be a mistake.

That's another problem. I'm Nintendo's original market. I've owned every system they've ever put out, save Virtual Boy. If they're not appealing to me, then who are they appealing to? I think they're imaging a market that just isn't there. True, there are going to be a few people right off the bat who say, "Oh, that system is cheaper than the other two, I'll get that." But that won't last. They're alienating alot of game developers with this move, who won't be able to put out cross platform games like they can now. Hell, most cross platform games skip over Gamecube as it is.

Like they have now, Microsoft and Sony are going to offer huge libraries of games for every type of gamer out there. Nintendo will offer only a few specialized games. And once the few people who want to play those games have bought them, sales will dry up, and Nintendo will die. At least as far as consoles go. I hope the next Metroid and Zelda games will get released on PS3 and XBox360, because I would hate to see those series die.

[Mike Pothier]

Its not just oppinion. Its based on the fact that Gamecube has 4 fewer buttons than PS2 or XBox controllers. This limits it. One thing it did do right was shape the buttons differently, making it easy to tell the buttons across by touch. But the benefits of this wear off quickly compared to an XBox controller once I learned the button lay out, which did not take long (I played GC long before I played XBox).

It most certainly IS opinion. Unless you have a game that is designed from the ground up for a certain console, such as Splinter Cell, there is no limit. I've never seen a single instance where a developer has ran into problems making a multiplatform game conform to the GC controller.

There are reasons why Sony and Microsoft make their controllers the way they do. Those toggles are a technology that have been tried and proven for years. They work. Motion sensor tech, even if it works, is flawed in its very concept. As I pointed out in a previous post, sneeze, mess up your game. Cat wants attention and bats at your hand, mess up your game. Reach for the pause button because you see one of these distractions coming, and mess up your game because moving your thumb moved your whole hand.

It isn't a flawed concept. It just hasn't been implemented correctly. Whats inherently flawed is the what we are using now. Like it or not, its limiting. True 3D movement has never been possible before. Nintendo is attempting to fix that.

Not IGN, but I have read several oppinions on these controllers. Nothing they have said has persuaded me. What Nintendo is doing limits their system's abilities. Even with attachments. The nunchuck attachment still leaves it with fewer abilities than the existing Gamecube controller. Other attachments, just mean I have to spend extra.

Wrong on all accounts. As I said before, the RevCon is not limiting at all. It has just as many, if not more, options as the GC controller. As I explained, the true 3D tracking takes care of several buttons on its own. That means there is no need for 22 buttons at your disposal.

[GremlinClr]

And how am I supposed to side step the attack of the guy I'm dueling? With the controller the Revolution is giving me, I'm a stationary target.

You're still thinking as if you're holding a regular controller. I could be wrong, but I think Nintendo would have have thought of basic movement don't you?


I typically invest hundreds of hours into RPGs. I've logged at least dozens of hours into playing Halo 2 on XBox Live and far more into LAN parties with the first Halo. If I'm not a serious gamer, then the definition would have to be someone who has no job or school and sits in their parent's basement for 16 hours a day playing non stop.

I had considered the possiblity of such a sword fighting game long before you mentioned it. No matter how many times I go through the possiblities in my head, the downsides always drown them out completely. I may be completely wrong, but a life time of playing video games tells me that I am not. Nintendo is making a mistake, and this time it is going to really hurt them.

By serious gamer I mean someone that cares about the industry and actually welcomes innovation. At least Nintendo is trying, Sony and Microsoft aren't aware of what innovation is.


There is already a game like that in arcades (which was terrible, by the way). Several actually, it's not as new and exciting as you'd have people believe. Hell, there was an old PC game called "Die by the Sword" which does exactly what you're describing, except with a mouse instead of a controller. Even the Eye-toy did this to some degree.

And just because someone else did it wrong that means Nintendo can't do it right?


And games now don't require skill? If there was some way I could laugh in your face right now, I'd be doing it

I said button mashers had no skill, not every single modern game takes no skill, over analyze much?



Here's a crazy idea folks, let's actually see the finished product before proclaiming it's the next big console failure or next great sucess, k? I think I'm pretty safe in assuming no one here has actually played with the thing yet, until we do all we're doing is talking in circles.

[Sanagi]

Here's a crazy idea folks, let's actually see the finished product before proclaiming it's the next big console failure or next great sucess, k? I think I'm pretty safe in assuming no one here has actually played with the thing yet, until we do all we're doing is talking in circles.
Behold, the voice of reason.

[Xero Kaiser]

And just because someone else did it wrong that means Nintendo can't do it right

It means they're gonna have to show me something before I start doing backflips over the Rev. Everytime Nintendo comes out with something they swear up and down that it's gonna change everything

[madevil]

EDIT: This post is boring so Im gonna add pictures.

Most systems come out with alot of hype. Always there is some speculation about which one will trump the other and be the most successful. Fans of one will swear up and down that fans of the other will drop anything they are playing to go buy their system because of X game or Y feature.
http://wwwstu.tcu.edu/~jjnussrallah/newsanchors.gif
But lets face the only thing thats fact in the equation. Gamers play different games, and play them for different reasons. I for one don't play games that come out on the Xbox. I have one. But there are very few games that come out for it that appeal to my gaming senses.

PS2 does. Cube does. Xbox doesnt.

Equation equals: me buy ps2 + me buy cube.

Xbox360 doesn't interest me. (Aside from ES: Oblivion) I've played fight night on my PS2, and unless there is significant changes to the way the game is played, I dont care about the major graphical upgrade. I'll still get bored after I get my first professional belt, like i did on the ps2.

Ghost Recon interests me the way most FPS's do. I wanna shoot stuff for about 10 hours, total game time. Unless the multi-player has more to it that CounterStrike did or Team Fortress did way back when, those were some great multiplay, I don't see how the major graphical overhaul can get me past the boredom I get when I play another FPS.

Ive got no doubt that if I had an Xbox 360 right now, I'd be playing it. As long as I had one of the few games that I'd enjoy. But, I'd still be waiting for the PS3 to come out, cuz it has the games I REALLY want to spend some time on.

What Im saying is regardless of graphical update, Microsoft does not pump out the games that keep me entertained so 360 doesnt get my money.

So my full take on the whole system battle? I personally think 360 will have games that are just graphical overhauls of previous games that have sold well, or played well. So if I already played that older game, Ive played the new one too.

Revalution is a wildcard. They have a great track record for making great games. And they will be innovative.
http://img233.exs.cx/img233/2880/audioal23jb.png
But I think the only ones thats getting my hard earned money is gonna be the PS3. They overhaul games I already like, (id pay for a tekken overhaul cuz I already LIKE tekken, its already been innovated) I think that innovation will come from ps3 developers because playstation has always had innovations.

I look forward to games on this system that Ive never heard about yet. But I know in my heart that microsoft is gonna have X game, because it, or it's gameplay has already been sold in the millions. One graphic overhaul later, hey sweet, its... this ... game... again.

PS3 has all the makings of a great system. A huge alotment of 3rd party developers, plus the tried and true gameplay games, plus the features (bluetooth), PLUS the graphical update.

OWNED:
http://www.rofl.name/owned/owned_tank.jpg
Xbox to me is a PS2.
Except it only gets games that we've already played.
Or takes the gameplay from another game.
But, it had to have sold well.
So why buy one when I already have the first game cuz it came out on PS2 already as the same game or one with the same gameplay?

[Black Atom]

Nice post. I especially dig the pics. And for the most part, I agree with you. I don't necessarily need all-new versions of games that're already around--even the ones I like. I'm a pretty big Halo fan, but I'm not dying for Bungie to crank out a new one. Even the new Zelda I'm not dying to get: what does it offer that's different from Wind Waker (or any Zelda going back to Ocarina), which was one of the best-looking games of this last generation? I feel this way for two reasons:

-Sequels suck. Sure, VGs have a slightly better track record than movies, but things don't always change for the better.
-Money. How many times do you bastards expect me to keep buying the same games over and over? When I have to consider the money I will have to spend to take full advantage of the graphics and sound improvements (i.e. HD and surround set-ups) then the upgrade, in general, becomes less appealing.

[Eagle299]

It most certainly IS opinion. Unless you have a game that is designed from the ground up for a certain console, such as Splinter Cell, there is no limit. I've never seen a single instance where a developer has ran into problems making a multiplatform game conform to the GC controller.

And when was the last time a cross platform title came out for the cube? I know they didn't get a version of Destroy All Humans. Or Godzilla Save the Earth, inspite of the fact that the original Destroy All Monsters Melee came out for the Cube.

No, this is not because of the controller. THere are other reasons companies aren't making games for Gamecube right now. But with the Revolution Controller, alot of companies aren't even going to try.

It isn't a flawed concept. It just hasn't been implemented correctly. Whats inherently flawed is the what we are using now. Like it or not, its limiting. True 3D movement has never been possible before. Nintendo is attempting to fix that.

Do you have any idea how stupid this statement makes you sound? There have been numerous games with 3D movement in them. As far back as Mario 64. Godzilla Save the Earth has 3D movement. Ninja Gaiden. The Spiderman games. Halo and Halo 2. Hell, the original Star Fox for Super Nintendo had limited 3D movement.

Wrong on all accounts. As I said before, the RevCon is not limiting at all. It has just as many, if not more, options as the GC controller. As I explained, the true 3D tracking takes care of several buttons on its own. That means there is no need for 22 buttons at your disposal.

You're making the flawed assumption that it will have 3D tracking. At best, it will take the place of a single toggle. Just because we can imagine a dueling game like the one described above doesn't mean that the Revolution can actually deliver it.

On the matter of what they can deliver, I know I haven't seen a single screen shot of a single Revolution game. And I read game magazines quite often. I've seen articals on PS3 and XBox360 games that won't come out until next year. But not a single developer has put forth an idea for a single Revolution game. This tells me, either they're being Batfamily level Ninjas about their developement, or, they're just not trying. And since the latter senario is the far more likely, this is not good for Nintendo.

[Mike Pothier]

And when was the last time a cross platform title came out for the cube? I know they didn't get a version of Destroy All Humans. Or Godzilla Save the Earth, inspite of the fact that the original Destroy All Monsters Melee came out for the Cube.

No, this is not because of the controller. THere are other reasons companies aren't making games for Gamecube right now. But with the Revolution Controller, alot of companies aren't even going to try.

There have been plenty of cross platform games for the GC. As you said, it was sales, not the controller, that made many companies back away from it. I personally think a lot of companies will try out the new controller. But its only assumption. Like GremlinClr said, we have to wait and see.

Do you have any idea how stupid this statement makes you sound? There have been numerous games with 3D movement in them. As far back as Mario 64. Godzilla Save the Earth has 3D movement. Ninja Gaiden. The Spiderman games. Halo and Halo 2.

No, none of them had true 3D movement. In order to move in an X/Y/Z fashion, at least two analog sticks were needed, and still OTHER buttons for pitch, yaw, rolling, and other subtle movements. Guess how many of these things will the RevCon cover?

Hell, the original Star Fox for Super Nintendo had limited 3D movement.

Limited? It was a rail game. The controls were completely 2D.

You're making the flawed assumption that it will have 3D tracking. At best, it will take the place of a single toggle. Just because we can imagine a dueling game like the one described above doesn't mean that the Revolution can actually deliver it.

It WILL have 3D tracking. Everything I covered above, that takes several buttons in order to accomplish, will be taken care of. I'm not saying its a fact that the Revolution will deliver this, but the potential is there, and is greater then we've ever seen.

On the matter of what they can deliver, I know I haven't seen a single screen shot of a single Revolution game. And I read game magazines quite often. I've seen articals on PS3 and XBox360 games that won't come out until next year. But not a single developer has put forth an idea for a single Revolution game. This tells me, either they're being Batfamily level Ninjas about their developement, or, they're just not trying. And since the latter senario is the far more likely, this is not good for Nintendo.

Most developers are just getting their kits. Hell, it will be another year before its released. Of course we haven't seen anything yet. But you have to be intentionally deaf if you haven't heard the developers talking about it. A LOT of developers are very intrigued by this new controller.

[Mike Pothier]

dammit, dp

[Black Atom]

Here's an article called "Life after the video game crash" by David Wong at pointlesswasteoftime.com You guys may find this interesting:

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

[madevil]

yeah, interesting read. Im almost 30 now. I get alot of his points. But disagree, or merely, have rebuttal (sp) for them.

Again, the novelty of getting to be Luke Skywalker attracted gamers in droves. We were never really able to do that before. The experience of being able to stride down a hallway blowing up monsters with a rail gun was also new to a lot of you. But it comes to the same, doesn't it? The first time you play a level, the monster around the first corner is a surprise. After that, it's homework. It's memorizing, via pure repetition, bad guy placement and ammunition deposits and card keys. "Okay, kill the mutant behind the crate. Duck behind the dual doors. Wait for guard to walk out. Kill him, take his key. There's two Hellgoats in this next hall. Pick up the rockets..."
And this is how I feel playing most games. Even games I feel are great end up like this. DMC3:SE i played up till the last few missions, then for fun, played bloody palace mode to hone my skills in the different styles that I have yet not tried.

Yep, I mastered em. Well, for me, mastering means I could finish the game. Now I know that. and well, I don't feel like doing the last missions any more. a waste of time just to see some cut scenes.

I never liked cut scenes. Tell me the story in the frikkin game. I'm not impressed with CG anymore. I find myself skipping them even on the first time thru.

[MKTerra]

And when was the last time a cross platform title came out for the cube? I know they didn't get a version of Destroy All Humans. Or Godzilla Save the Earth, inspite of the fact that the original Destroy All Monsters Melee came out for the Cube.Soul Calibur II?

But then SCIII went PS2-exclusive... :/

Btw, last I heard, GameCube controllers will work with the Revo. Not sure whether they'll work with non-GC games though.

[Black Atom]

Sonic Riders just came out, I think, this week for all three consoles. RE4 was meant to be GC-exclusive, so the stuff about the controller being limiting is...unfounded.

[GremlinClr]

Here's some new Revolution Pics (http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=24460063&page=0) from GDC taken today.

[MKTerra]

Hmm, it looks thicker than I thought from previous pictures :/

*reads linked article*

Aww, it is thicker. Kind of a pity; It looks more like a tiny tower PC unit now. On the plus side, it kept the blue light around the slot :)

I wonder if they're holding out on us so they can release a thinner "lite" version later on... =_= :p

[Astonishing X-Fan]

I don't care how "innovative" they are...if the Revolution has the same pathetically small lineup of great games that the Gamecube did, it loses in my book. I don't want to wait six months in between releases of the titles worth owning.

[PIMPurself]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america

[Xero Kaiser]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america

Just take the best of both worlds and mock them for missing out

[cactusmaac]

To back up Eagle299, I remember a couple of years ago there were complaints about why there weren't more beat-em-ups being translated to the Cube and the answer given was that it was difficult to adapt them to the controller.

Having played all three controllers for the Cube, XBox and PS2 I'll say I prefer the XBox S controller out of all of them for comfort and ease of use across a broad range of games. The Black and White buttons are awkwardly placed but then I've barely had to use them. The GC controller worked well with exclusives but not as well in other cases.

[BlairH]

Hmm, it looks thicker than I thought from previous pictures :/

*reads linked article*

Aww, it is thicker. Kind of a pity; It looks more like a tiny tower PC unit now. On the plus side, it kept the blue light around the slot :)

I wonder if they're holding out on us so they can release a thinner "lite" version later on... =_= :p

I like it! The blue light around the slot will go well with the cathodes in my PC.

Any word yet on whether the revo will support VGA so that I can plug it in to my monitor? Also, will it support HD resolutions?

[SuperSaiyaMan12]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america
...you know this post could get you banned for being kind of racist..

[madevil]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america
you do know that both the PS3 and revalution will be broadband capable right?

And taking japanese games off the USA market and we'll have...less games to choose from! yay, we all want LESS games, right?

..duh.

[Black Atom]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america

It has no more to do with stubborness or loyalty in Japan than it does here. It's a different market/culture with different tastes. XBox live, which is a big advantage here in the US, isn't as big a deal in the Japan markets and they don't seem to like FPSs as much as we do. You'd have to similarly call Americans "stubborn" for not supporting systems like the Dreamcast or the GC here, when they performed well in Japan.

[Xero Kaiser]

you do know that both the PS3 and revalution will be broadband capable right?

The PS2 and GC did too, (the PS2 did at least not sure about GC). Being capable of it doesn't matter if you don't take advantage of it like MS has

You'd have to similarly call Americans "stubborn" for not supporting systems like the Dreamcast or the GC here, when they performed well in Japan..

Don't you have that backwards? I know the DC didn't suffer from a lack of support in the US and the GC is going downhill anywhere you look. Even in Japan it's putting up far less numbers than the PS2 (like...1/10th of them in some cases)

[PIMPurself]

you do know that both the PS3 and revalution will be broadband capable right?

And taking japanese games off the USA market and we'll have...less games to choose from! yay, we all want LESS games, right?

..duh.
thats not even close to the same thing as xbox live

[PIMPurself]

the thing about japanese games was kinda a joke. sorry if it wasn't very funny. in all seriousness, we buy all kinds of japanese crap over here, i wonder why they just don't like all of our stuff, even when its obviosly better than them (gamecube im pointing at you)

[Xero Kaiser]

the thing about japanese games was kinda a joke. sorry if it wasn't very funny. in all seriousness, we buy all kinds of japanese crap over here, i wonder why they just don't like all of our stuff, even when its obviosly better than them (gamecube im pointing at you)

If you're trying to figure out why crap like FFX-2 sells and games like Neverwinter Nights, KOTOR and Elders Scrolls don't, you'll only go insane

But Japan has given us the "Tales of.." games :cool:

[Black Atom]

Don't you have that backwards? I know the DC didn't suffer from a lack of support in the US and the GC is going downhill anywhere you look. Even in Japan it's putting up far less numbers than the PS2 (like...1/10th of them in some cases)

DC was still going strong in Japan about a year after it was effectively dead here in the US, including their SegaNet servers. My point is just that we're very different audiences in respect to games.

[sir_snikt'alot]

xbox360 having xbox live destroys them both. its japanese people are just stubburn and they think they have to stay strue to sony and nintendo. We should do the same to them and boycott all japanese games from america

no its that the japanese like fun ,innovative games(example :katmari damacy), what they dont want is 5'000 gta ripoffs and shed loads of e.a sports games.

most of the games i have are from japanese publishers,because they're the best at coming up with fresh ideas rather than steal everyone else's.

[Xero Kaiser]

what they dont want is 5'000 gta ripoffs and shed loads of e.a sports games.

Nope. Instead they want Sloppy half-assed games based off whatever flavor-of-the-week Anime is hot at the moment, 5,000 FF games, countless Street Fighter rehashes, Mario Kart knockoffs, endless "Xtreme" versions of Dynasty Warriors games and whatever 'Simple 2000' game is being crapped out that week

Same s***, different flies

[BlairH]

Nope. Instead they want Sloppy half-assed games based off whatever flavor-of-the-week Anime is hot at the moment, 5,000 FF games, countless Street Fighter rehashes, Mario Kart knockoffs, endless "Xtreme" versions of Dynasty Warriors games and whatever 'Simple 2000' game is being crapped out that week

Same s***, different flies
Indeed. I believe all regions are equally innovative. (that is to say, unfortunately not very innovative at all) If anything, I'd say that some of the games coming from Eastern European developers in the near future look quite innovative (STALKER, Armed Assault, etc)

Japan is the same as everywhere else: It's only every so often that you get a gem like ICO out of the mud of identikit RPGs and so forth.

[sir_snikt'alot]

Nope. Instead they want Sloppy half-assed games based off whatever flavor-of-the-week Anime is hot at the moment, 5,000 FF games, countless Street Fighter rehashes, Mario Kart knockoffs, endless "Xtreme" versions of Dynasty Warriors games and whatever 'Simple 2000' game is being crapped out that week

Same s***, different flies

and yet the majority of innovative games come from japan-

shadow of the colossus
katamari
metal gear-the first game ever to avoid going in guns blazing.
street fighter-the first 'decent' beat 'em up.
shenmue.

you say japan only dishes up flavour of the week anime games,and yet every japan games chart i see i see no such thing,look at an american chart and you'll see madden,nba,something with the words street crime or 25 to life or some crap like that.

[BlairH]

shadow of the colossus
As awesome as SOTC is, I wouldn't be so quick in defending how innovative it is. It is -after all- only 16 or so boss battles. It's the manner in which the game is presented, and held together by delicious "gaming glue" that shows up SOTCs greatness.

katamari
It's different, but in what way does it innovate?

metal gear-the first game ever to avoid going in guns blazing.
Hideo Kojima himself has stated that the MG games "are not Japanese games". They are very much aimed at westerners, and offer a very western style of play. His words. Not mine.

street fighter-the first 'decent' beat 'em up.
I'll give you that.

shenmue.
Please, Ultima Online had the whole persistant world/alternate life thing sewn up way before Shenmue, and it didn't have the crappy dialogue.

"Excuse me, I'm looking for some sailors! Do you know where I could find...some sailors?"

you say japan only dishes up flavour of the week anime games
I don't think he said that. He certianly didn't mean "only".

and yet every japan games chart i see i see no such thing,look at an american chart and you'll see madden,nba,something with the words street crime or 25 to life or some crap like that.
Aye those games are crap, and recieve very little critical acclaim (with the exception of the one or two) blame the consumer for that, not the developers. I hate "charts" in general anyway. Popularity does not a game make!

[Xero Kaiser]

and yet the majority of innovative games come from japan-

shadow of the colossus
katamari
metal gear-the first game ever to avoid going in guns blazing.
street fighter-the first 'decent' beat 'em up.
shenmue.

I could slap you in the face with about a laundry list of american games that were innovative (especially if we start breaking out the PC games) but since you seem to equate "decent" with "innovative", why bother? How were Katamari and SotC innovative? Not everything that's slightly different is innovation

,look at an american chart and you'll see madden,nba,something with the words street crime or 25 to life or some crap like that.

What are you talking about? True Crime? 25 to life? Bulletproof? Those games sold like crap. In some cases, they sold so bad that the series was canceled outright (True Crime). What charts are you looking at? But good job ignoring the games that actually do sell in America (99% of which don't have a felony in their title).

Does Madden sell? Yes it does. So what? Soccer games and racing (i.e. Sports) do pretty well in Japan, so what point are you trying to make?

you say japan only dishes up flavour of the week anime games,and yet every japan games chart i see i see no such thing

I never said that those games lit up the sales chart and I never said they were the only games being made (that's kinda why I listed like 6 different examples), but they do get made and they get made often, but if you want to sit there and pretend that licensed anime-based games aren't being pushed out the door in waves in Japan, go right on ahead.

[Mike Pothier]

and yet the majority of innovative games come from japan.

BS. 90% of the games from Japan are carbon copies of each other. And thats just the crap that DOESN'T make it over seas. If you think Japanese developers care less about making money, you really need a wake up call.

Both sides have their equal share of crap, and equal share of innovative developers.

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Nope. Instead they want Sloppy half-assed games based off whatever flavor-of-the-week Anime is hot at the moment, 5,000 FF games, countless Street Fighter rehashes, Mario Kart knockoffs, endless "Xtreme" versions of Dynasty Warriors games and whatever 'Simple 2000' game is being crapped out that week

Same s***, different flies


I happy you said that. People can't say dumb s**t like that.

Here's some innovative games from the US or Europe:

Full Spectrum Warriors
Socom
Warcraft/Starcraft: Though it is RTS, you can't deny the impact of these series
The Burnout Series
Psychonauts
Psi-Ops
Believe or not, the GTA series.
Half Life/ Counter Strike
The Prince of Persia series


Those are just some examples. Don't make it seem like Japan's the only place with great and innovative games.

And Nintendo isn't the only company trying innovative ideas. Just because you don't got cable doesn't mean Microsoft isn't trying any innovative ideas.

Xbox Live, downloadable content, and the hard drive in the Xbox are two "innovative" ideas. The 360 added even more to Xbox Live, which is great.

The PS3 is using new groundbraking technology to make sure it's on top in the graphics department. The great thing about the Playstation is that it's vast variety of good games makes the system so popular, not it's capablitities (though as I've said, they are improving that department).

I'm sick of people using the "innovative" card. I mean, people do that with music, but to me, no matter how innovative some artists are, it's how good the music is that counts. That's why I like G-Unit (or at least Banks) more than Dilated People. And that's why I think the PS3 will be better than both systems.

But I'm still keeping my 360. :p

[Black Atom]

I happy you said that. People can't say dumb s**t like that.

Here's some innovative games from the US or Europe:

Full Spectrum Warriors
Socom
Warcraft/Starcraft: Though it is RTS, you can't deny the impact of these series
The Burnout Series
Psychonauts
Psi-Ops
Believe or not, the GTA series.
Half Life/ Counter Strike
The Prince of Persia series


Those are just some examples. Don't make it seem like Japan's the only place with great and innovative games.

And Nintendo isn't the only company trying innovative ideas. Just because you don't got cable doesn't mean Microsoft isn't trying any innovative ideas.

Xbox Live, downloadable content, and the hard drive in the Xbox are two "innovative" ideas. The 360 added even more to Xbox Live, which is great.

The PS3 is using new groundbraking technology to make sure it's on top in the graphics department. The great thing about the Playstation is that it's vast variety of good games makes the system so popular, not it's capablitities (though as I've said, they are improving that department).

I'm sick of people using the "innovative" card. I mean, people do that with music, but to me, no matter how innovative some artists are, it's how good the music is that counts. That's why I like G-Unit (or at least Banks) more than Dilated People. And that's why I think the PS3 will be better than both systems.

But I'm still keeping my 360. :p

SegaNet predates XBox Live in doing just about everything Microsoft's doing with it now. I give them kudos for developing the idea futher and making it work though, I can't begrudge them that at all. And the pursuit of better graphics has been every company's MO from the beginning--no creativity points for Sony on that. So if I had to hand out kewpies for innovation alone, the award goes to Nintendo this round easily. Hell, look how up in arms people are over the Rev controller. They are decidedly playing it the least "safe". Whether that will translate to quality? Nobody knows yet.

[blackdragon6]

Other attachments, just mean I have to spend extra.
if people are willing to spend 300 dollars for a system then i don';t see how this would bankrupt them lol

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

http://myspace-163.vo.llnwd.net/00305/36/18/305008163_m.gif

Mario: " you see how they scatter when i pull up in my caddy, but imma handle the matter, niggas talkin behind my back with all the envious chatter, but when a muthafucka clash wit 'em, they just rappin, nigga fuck that!"
-Talkin bout Sony and Microsoft

Nintendo is the Bone Thugs of gaming,one of greatest of all time and ready for a comeback!

[Phrozen]

and yet the majority of innovative games come from japan-

shadow of the colossus
katamari
metal gear-the first game ever to avoid going in guns blazing.
street fighter-the first 'decent' beat 'em up.
shenmue.


First, if I were you I would look up Sid Meier.

Then, I would go look up the games: Wolfenstein 3D, Civilization, Populus, Black & White, Dune 2000, Ultima Online, Ultima I, Curse of Monkey Island, Operation: Flashpoint, Half-Life, Quake II, Shogun: Total War, Myth, Sim City, and I could go on and on.

Maybe for you console dwellers you may think Japan makes the most creative games, but us PC gamers now that innovation comes from all over the world.

[BlairH]

First, if I were you I would look up Sid Meier.

Then, I would go look up the games: Wolfenstein 3D, Civilization, Populus, Black & White, Dune 2000, Ultima Online, Ultima I, Curse of Monkey Island, Operation: Flashpoint, Half-Life, Quake II, Shogun: Total War, Myth, Sim City, and I could go on and on.

Maybe for you console dwellers you may think Japan makes the most creative games, but us PC gamers now that innovation comes from all over the world.

Amen!
PC gaming is certianly more open to innovation than the rather insular console markets. It's probably the best platform for indie developers to create games for. I mean, look at Counterstrike. Plus it offers the most powerful hardware which I believe opens up more oppourtunities. (although this has been limited recently with the advent/problem of cross platform development)

You also listed one of my fave games: Operation Flashpoint. BIS is currently developing a semi follow up to OFP. Armed Assault.

[pennywisdom]

I'm not terribly worried because I'm a casual gamer, and I never buy launch systems. The first consoles out the door are usually buggy and often need recalled, they're painfully expensive, the game library might have a few awesome titles but it will most likely lack real depth, it will be harder to find used games... etc. etc. It's a great idea to wait a year or two and test the water slowly. I think PS2 is just fine for me right now.

Having said that, if I were going to buy any of these systems at launch, price would be a huge factor. I wouldn't even consider an X360 for what it's going for and I definitely wouldn't consider a PS3 for what you guys are claiming it will go for. The thing with these next-gen systems is that the price increase is too high to reflect the evolution of the games. While I'm sure these newer systems will be advanced beyond the ones we're playing now, the initial launch games will not be SO far into the future that it merits plunking down 400 bucks. That's why I didn't even consider X360.

As for the PS3's price, I can barely believe what I'm hearing. There's no way Sony would be stupid enough to charge 600 dollars for a videogame console. They just won't do it. I don't care what the circumstances surrounding the production are... anyone with the business sense of a ten-year-old knows that you can only charge what people would pay if you plan on selling anything. This isn't advanced business philosophy, it's just simple supply and demand. You can't sell a twelve year old Ford Taurus for 500,000 dollars just because you feel like it. The market won't support a 600 dollar video game console and Sony HAS to know this. The price will be much lower. Sony can not possibly be crazy enough to deliberately shoot itself in the foot like that. Nobody's going to willingly sign their own death warrant.

And to the people who claim Sony maniacs will pay whatever they need to in order to get the PS3: there's a limit. If the system costs 600 dollars at launch, no one will buy it.

John Davison in OPM, Official PlayStation Magazine April 2006:

On the PS3 launch predictions:

"I'm going to say November in the US, and I'm going to say that it won't be a penny more than $399.99. Why? Because Sony really can't afford to more than a year behind its main competition, and Microsoft has set the pricing precedent that only a crazy person would break.

You can't turn up to the party late, demand more cash, and just keep your fingers crossed that everyone's dumb enough to tolerate that. The guts of the PS3 may well be made of magic beans and alien technology, but the Xbox 360 has set the price point."

[cactusmaac]

I wouldn't call the PC a particularly innovative platform. Most of the games that come out for it are either FPS' or strategy RPGs.

And Monkey Island?

Graphcal adventure games like that are dead.

[Xero Kaiser]

There are strategy RPGs on the PC? I never see any 0_o

[BlairH]

I wouldn't call the PC a particularly innovative platform. Most of the games that come out for it are either FPS' or strategy RPGs.
Aye, but for every 10 FPS games there's an overlooked gem like Operation Flashpoint, Hostile Waters or System Shock.

And Monkey Island?

Graphcal adventure games like that are dead.
Nah, they just eveolved into Broken Sword.

[cactusmaac]

There are strategy RPGs on the PC? I never see any 0_o

Meh. Meant strategy games.