Next-gen Consoles

[Bliss]

Why should people wait a few months before they get their next-gen consoles?
I want to get one about a month before it comes out, but I don't know why people are telling me I should wait awhile first.

Is it because of new hardware added later on?

(And which ones are you guys gonna get. I am getting Xbox 360, then later on Revolution which shouldn't cost as much. The standard 360 is going to be $399 while the premium one is going to be $499)

[Bobbybirdtree]

They tell you to get one after awhile because a lot of the time the hardware can be undertested and may have faults. I would expect it too with microsoft pushing 360 out the door this early.

[hanacker]

(And which ones are you guys gonna get. I am getting Xbox 360, then later on Revolution which shouldn't cost as much. The standard 360 is going to be $399 while the premium one is going to be $499)

Where do you get your info?

LA Times says $300 and $400

http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/cotown/la-fi-rup17.2aug17,1,331393.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true

Reasons to wait would be that the price may drop, the hardware may get better (there are seven or so generations of PS2s and the original Xbox harddrive sucked), and there won't be many games at launch. But if you really want it, the reasons aren't that overwhelming.

[hanacker]

If you're in Peru, why are you listing Canadian prices?

[Rogue_7]

yeah, if you wait a bit you get 3 things

1) improved stability
2) lower prices
3) more games

I'm leaning towards a PS3 for its Blu-Ray support, but we shall see. I've never been much of a console gamer, so I may just stick with my laptop.

[Shadowknight]

While I have no problem with buying games, I'll just wait until someone comes up with a free emulator program. I've gotten tired of spending $200-$300 for one or more consoles - particuarly at the same time when I only want to play 2 or 3 games in particular, so I have to buy an entire new system to play them.

[CorSec]

Don't get an xbox 360 unless it comes with: HD-DVD and a hard drive. Microsoft is trying too hard to get a box that says "Xbox 360" out by Christmas, and is sacrificing a lot to get there.
If you don't get the version with HD-DVD, you will be limited later on when the xbox 360 version 2 comes out. If you don't have a hard drive, you can't play xbox 1 games at all, and you probably need a memory card.

Also, don't expect to get an Xbox 360 and be able to play all or any of your Xbox 1 games immediatly. The backwards compatability on the Xbox 360 is something that you have to download for each game, when it is released by the publisher of the game.

[Bliss]

I don't have an HDTV anyway, and I will not get one anytime soon, that's for sure. Aren't they like $2000 for the good ones?

[Elethiomel]

Lower price + Downloadable old games + Weird mystery controller + Shigeru Miyamoto = WIN

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

[hapacheese]

Bah, you can get a good HDTV for under $800 nowadays. Depends on what size you want, and whether or not you want a normal CRT TV or a flat panel.

[AnimeFan3oo3]

I'm thinking about getting either Xbox 360 or PS3. Not both. (well, not unless I win the lottery) I'm not even thinking about getting the Revolution.

The PS3 seems to have the best specs, but being a fan of the original Xbox, I'm drawn a little to it.

Then again, I might not buy either. I'm rather satisfied with my PC.

[hapacheese]

Don't buy a machine based on the specs (unless there is a *huge* gap). At least with X360 and PS3, the machines will be close enough in spec that it won't make any difference. Buy the machine that will have the games you enjoy.

Or wait until the prices come down, then buy them both.

[CorSec]

I don't have an HDTV anyway, and I will not get one anytime soon, that's for sure. Aren't they like $2000 for the good ones?

HD-DVD doesn't mean that the vido is in high definition. HD-DVD movies are in high definition, but for the Xbox 360 HD-DVD means more space, as in 15 GB compared to 5 or 9 GB for a regular DVD.

[Citizen]

I'll be getting all three, the best versions. I'm most eager to get a PS3. No point in waiting a month. Prices won't drop in one month, and if there is anything wrong with the first batch of systems, they will probably be fixed or replaced for free anyways, just like last gen.

[Dresh]

I'll definately be getting a Revolution. Like the X360, it will also come in "Standard" and "Deluxe" packages; the only difference between them of which I know is that the "Deluxe" version can play DVDs. I think it's safe to assume that it'll be the cheapest of its generation. I may also get a "Standard" X360 package. The PS3 is too expensive for me to bother with it, though I do want to play Tekken 6.

[co_delphi]

skip HD, go DLP. no scanlines no nothing and you can pick how large you want the screeen to be http://www.computeronline.com/dellprojectors.html

[hapacheese]

HD-DVD doesn't mean that the vido is in high definition. HD-DVD movies are in high definition, but for the Xbox 360 HD-DVD means more space, as in 15 GB compared to 5 or 9 GB for a regular DVD.

And why should space on the disk matter to the end user...?

Most games hardly take up the space that's on a single normal DVD, anyway. Simply adding more "stuff" does not make the game better.

[Artie]

Lower price + Downloadable old games + Weird mystery controller + Shigeru Miyamoto = WIN

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

Go Revolution~

[Citizen]

Lower price = cheap pos
Downloadable games = ZOMG lolzorz!!11 we've had emulators for years, and they're free.
Weird mystery controller = people will stop loving it if it sucks
Shigeru Miyamoto = Been a hack for years

I'm a Nintendo fan. Actually, I'm a game fan in general. No fanboyism towards any consol(although Sony is my favorite at the moment, it's from a quality standpoint), but I wasn't at all impressed by Revolution. If Nintendo doesn'tt step it up a lot from the GC, and I do mean a lot(let's face it, the GC, in general, had a pathetic run), they might as well just go out of business now. But they won't. The greedy bastards will always have enough money to keep their dying company alive. So I demand quality.

[Scapegoat Handy]

Is the PS3 going to be backwards compatable with PS1 and PS2 games?

[scan2001]

Yes the PS3 is backwards compatable. I would wait to buy the X-box 360 until the PS3 come out because I can see Mircosoft lowering the price of the X-Box to screw with Sony.

[Bliss]

The PS3 will most likley be more expensive than the 360 anyway, so I dunno if they'd do that.

[D-pad]

Here's my 2 cents on how the next gens will rank.



1.PS3
2.Revolution (Oh ya! Can anyone say Dragon Quest 4, best NES game ever!)
3.Xbox 360

[Bliss]

In sales:

PS3
Xbox 360
Revolution

Yeah, everyone knew that already huh?

I hope nintendo doesn't die out after they've been in this for so long.

[Citizen]

I'd rather seem them die out than continue to have little to no merit in the gaming industry. There was nothing special about the GC as a consol, and it only got one worth while exclusive for every hundred or so worth while PS2 and Xbox exclusives.

If the Revolution doesn't put them back in the game, why continue? It just causes gamers to waste money.

[Mittens]

Im hoping so terribly badly that the 360 becomes a massive faliure mainly so I can hear from those Xbox-Fanboys moaning at how crap it was.

Whenever someone keeps going on about "Removable Drives" and "Incredible Power", i have an urge to smack them upside the head. What is the point in all these add-ons and accessories and specs if the games are going to suck? Lets face it, the only game going for 360 will be Halo 3. As for Final Fantasy 11, i feel sorry for any poor sod stupid enough to buy it. It sucked on PC, its going to suck on 360 (and i can say this from experience from playing 2000 hours + on it on the PC version)

What worries me the the possibility that Square-Enix might decide to start making games for the Xbox and leave Sony and Nintendo. And yes theres current dispute going on that SE have officially moved to Xbox. Its all bull to be honest. While its true that they are making another MMO apart from FFXI, they started it initially for the PC. FFXII (PS2) and FFXIII (PS3) are definately sony's.

If anyone can find an official source to clarify what exactly is going on with SE and the next Gen consoles, I'd be happy.

Anywho... I'll skip on the 360 and probably go for the rev first... Then eventually PS3

[koku]

don't product test the product for them.

just wait you silly man.

[Bliss]

Well, the games won't suck, and coming from a person who's never owned an Xbox, how would you know?

[ArkhanTerra]

I'm definately getting a PS3 and probably a Revolution... but God seems to hate me as I'll need all my money for college when they come out. I'll probably get a second temp job to afford games, because I can't just watch the next-gens float by.

Or if anyone wants to hit up my PayPal account... you know, that's cool too.

[tekkan]

PS3 For sure.

Maybe 360..but will wait for some reviews when it comes out. I never thought the x-box would become popular, but yet here it is. And it does have its benefits. And its got qualities I wished my PS2 had.

Should be interesting. And should be a huge dent in my wallet too.

[Bliss]

I am getting a job as a kid in a grocery store, 240 a month isn't bad, so it's great I can save up my money to buy these things without having to worry about the things you guys have to pay for like debt, rent and all that.
Hehe.

[Mittens]

Well, the games won't suck, and coming from a person who's never owned an Xbox, how would you know?

I own all three current generations consoles and I regularly play each...
Conker: Live and Reloaded for Xbox
Gran Turismo 4 for PS2
Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles* for GC

*I really dont know why people hated this game anyway.

[hanacker]

The PS3 is too expensive for me to bother with it, though I do want to play Tekken 6.

Huh? No price has been announced and it will likely be very competitive with the Xbox2 price.

[Bliss]

I own all three current generations consoles and I regularly play each...
Conker: Live and Reloaded for Xbox
Gran Turismo 4 for PS2
Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles* for GC

*I really dont know why people hated this game anyway.

Hey, I thought that game was great. People just think "HEY WHY ISN'T IT TURN BASED, BLAH BLAH." and all that shit, but it's great.

And I really think Xbox is going to start getting some great games for their next-gen console. Those coupled with Xbox Live will be amazing, with it's new features. But it sometimes depends on what type of game you like. Xbox has alot of first person shooters and not many Japanese RPG's, but that's supposed to change to appeal more Japanese gamers.

[tekkan]

Ya, the next gen Xbox console is for sure gonna get some awesome games for it.

The gaming companies know how successful the current Xbox is. Why wouldn't they want to cash in on that success?

Of course the PS consoles are just as good. So of course its gonna be a heated competition. But that is good for us gamers, cause that just means we're gonna be getting some really kick ass games.

[Dresh]

Huh? No price has been announced and it will likely be very competitive with the Xbox2 price.

While nothing has been completely confirmed yet, pretty much all speculation points at $400. In fact, the most likely Japanese price translates to about $465.

[TygressVirgo]

I can't stand x-box. There I said. I think Microsoft is getting a bit too powerful in my humble opinion.

I will definetly get a revoloution and a PS3. I'm not a constant gamer, but I usually get the bug to play in moments of boredom. I like nintendo games better because they usually a more group based than other consoles. Their games appeal to me more than any other type of game. I mean, I can't think of anything that beats Mario and crew, except maybe the final fantasy series.

Just my humble and simple opinion,
Ty

[Pfalzer]

I will buy and follow the Final Fantasy franchise lol so PS3 and Xbox 360. PS3 for sure ...not too sure about nintendo... if they fuck up marketing and technology this time i bet Sony or Microsoft will buy nintendo which may be a good thing for it. THey are dying why they have cut out the biggest population of gamers 16 and above. How they are doing it making kiddie games that are a good giggle and fart for only so long. Nintendo better put out or Ps3 and Xbox 360 are goign to gang bang it.

[hanacker]

While nothing has been completely confirmed yet, pretty much all speculation points at $400. In fact, the most likely Japanese price translates to about $465.

And $400 would be the exact same price as the Xbox2. Both the PS1 and PS2 launched for a bit cheaper in the US than in Japan (for the PS2 about $368 in Japan and $299 in the US). I'd expect to see the PS2 for $400, but it might be cheaper depending on how well the Xbox2 is doing. It might also be more expensive, but I doubt it.

[Mittens]

I will buy and follow the Final Fantasy franchise lol so PS3 and Xbox 360. PS3 for sure ...not too sure about nintendo... if they fuck up marketing and technology this time i bet Sony or Microsoft will buy nintendo which may be a good thing for it. THey are dying why they have cut out the biggest population of gamers 16 and above. How they are doing it making kiddie games that are a good giggle and fart for only so long. Nintendo better put out or Ps3 and Xbox 360 are goign to gang bang it.

See this is what gets me... Who says its aimed at kiddies? Has it ever occured to you that maybe nintendo are making (for arguments sake) kiddy games to make some fun games instead of bloodstained FPS's where you get to go up nice and close to an enemy and, in great detail, disfigure him?

I respect Nintendo because not only do they have the balls to be unique in their games and the way their games are played, but also because they stand their ground and continue making those kind of games despite the fact that there are people that slander nintendo's name because they are afraid to try something different.

[hapacheese]

If you are an adult and cannot enjoy the recent Zelda game, I feel sorry for you.

[TygressVirgo]

Yay for nintendo supporters! I don't like many of the other consoles games because many of them are just as Nalyubuites says.

I can't wait for Twilight Princess to come out. :)

[Citizen]

Who says its aimed at kiddies?

Idiots.

Has it ever occured to you that maybe nintendo are making (for arguments sake) kiddy games to make some fun games instead of bloodstained FPS's where you get to go up nice and close to an enemy and, in great detail, disfigure him?

Although the GC does in fact have gory games, and the PS2 and XBox have family friendly games. "Fun" is a reletive term anyways.

I respect Nintendo because not only do they have the balls to be unique in their games and the way their games are played

Wow, just like all gaming companies.

despite the fact that there are people that slander nintendo's name

Because Microsoft and Sony take so much less crap from people. Yeah, that's it. Mhm.

because they are afraid to try something different.

Oh, please, do spare me. :rolleyes:


If you are an adult and cannot enjoy the recent Zelda game, I feel sorry for you.

I'm an adult, and didn't find the most recent Zelda game entertaining. And it had nothing to do with me thinking it was childish, which I didn't. As long as I find a game fun, I'll play it. In fact, I don't find the series, in general, to be entertaining. You can keep the superiority complex driven sympathy though. :(

[Artie]

I will buy and follow the Final Fantasy franchise lol so PS3 and Xbox 360. PS3 for sure ...not too sure about nintendo... if they fuck up marketing and technology this time i bet Sony or Microsoft will buy nintendo which may be a good thing for it. THey are dying why they have cut out the biggest population of gamers 16 and above. How they are doing it making kiddie games that are a good giggle and fart for only so long. Nintendo better put out or Ps3 and Xbox 360 are goign to gang bang it.

Um, wow.

First off, Nintendo is actually the ONLY company of the last gen to MAKE a profit. Sony being dead even, and Mircosoft losing money.

Also, Nintendo has 7 billon in reserves, and the GameBoy is still easily the most bought handheld.

So next time you post, get your face out of Sony and Microsoft's asses.

[hapacheese]

Citizen: Re-reading my post, I realized the tone was not quite what I was going for. What I *really* meant to say was that I found the game to be so full of character and fairy tale-like fun that I wish all people could enjoy it.

[Citizen]

Citizen: Re-reading my post, I realized the tone was not quite what I was going for. What I *really* meant to say was that I found the game to be so full of character and fairy tale-like fun that I wish all people could enjoy it.

Ahhh, I see. In any case, I almost always post in a harsh tone, so no need to worry about me either.

[Arctic_Slicer]

Well last I looked the ps2 still made up like 54% of console sales. GameCube was on bottom with like 18% which of course leaves xbox at like 25% or so. So no I don't think the Gamecube was a huge success for Nintendo. Ever since the N64 Nintendo hasn't had as much luck finding 3rd party developers as Sony has. This in turn affects the sales of the console. Less games = less demand. In the upcomming generation I can't really see Nintendo doing much better than it did this generation. Xbox and PS3 will overshadow it and that's pretty much a fact. the PS2 proved that you didn't need to have superior hardware to have better sales. Considering Sony still has lots of good relations from their previous consoles I just don't see Nintendo taking away much glory from Sony in this respect. There is also the fact that the Xbox did outsell Nintendo that will make other game developers somewhat reluctant to commit software for the machine. Again less people who own the console will translate to less people who would want games for said console which of course means lower demand for a game developers product. Nintendo will probabally remain strong in the handheld department but I think their glory days in the console market are comming to an end.

With the upcomming generation we already know some of the third party developers Sony and Microsoft have. We know Square Enix will stay with Sony as Sony more or less owns the company so their games being developed for the PS3 is a given. EA games has already started making contracts with both companies; while I loathe and despise EA games their success as number software developer in US certainally can't be ignored. Of course what might be the most important for Microsoft is the contract with Mistwalker Studios to develop two games exclusively for the new Xbox system. For those of you who don't know about the company Mistwalker Studios was founded by former Square Enix employees; Hironobu Sakaguchi and Nobuo Uematsu. This is a very important in that it will give CRPG fans to consider Xbox over PS3. During the current era the number of CRPGs for the ps2 was certainally one of Sony's greatest advantages over other systems far as desirability as it was the only system that really had fair number of CRPG developers creating games for their system. During the next generation however this wont be the case.

[Y.T.]

Consoles are for losers. Who don't have any self respect at all.
Buying a computer that's hard to play pirated games on?
Buying something that is completely closed source?
Better to shoot yourself in the leg.
It's like buying a Macintosh. Being an ILemming:
http://www.therockalltimes.co.uk/2005/07/11/stern-ilemmings.html

There's no joy in beating a non-sentinent algorithm.
It's no achievment, beating a scripted scenario.
It's static. It can't fight back. It can't learn.
It'll never exact revenge on you.
There was no sweeter moment in my life then when
I won six times in row against a friend who, up to
that time, I had never defeated before.
It's just going through the motions...

[hapacheese]

Yes, because the only value of gaming is, you know, shooting other people o_O


(And buying a console for $300-400 will last you for 5 years. How much do you spend every 3 years in PC upgrades, only to find that a large portion of games have compatibility issues, need patches, etc?)

[Citizen]

Consoles are for losers. Who don't have any self respect at all.
Buying a computer that's hard to play pirated games on?
Buying something that is completely closed source?
Better to shoot yourself in the leg.
It's like buying a Macintosh. Being an ILemming:
http://www.therockalltimes.co.uk/2005/07/11/stern-ilemmings.html

There's no joy in beating a non-sentinent algorithm.
It's no achievment, beating a scripted scenario.
It's static. It can't fight back. It can't learn.
It'll never exact revenge on you.
There was no sweeter moment in my life then when
I won six times in row against a friend who, up to
that time, I had never defeated before.
It's just going through the motions...

Which is why consols have online support and one player games other than shooters that require more than shooting skills, thus making it not matter if the bots in the game, if there even are any(depending on what kind of game it is), are smart.

[Y.T.]

I know.
But all the multiplayer is.. official.

Yes, because the only value of gaming is, you know, shooting other people o_O
You never played IL-2. We shoot down each other's aeroplanes...
Or bomb each other. That's more fun.
Especially, bombing aircraft in flight !

[Bobbybirdtree]

I have been a pc gamer for a few years now. I have been a console gamer for an extremely long time however. To call console gamers losers basically voids any point you have. Consoles last longer, require no upgrades to play games, and cost far less. To upgrade my current computer it would cost in the range of 1500-2000 for a mid ranged system. Seeing as i can get a ps3 with better technology that can far outlast a pc i would say i am getting a pretty good deal.

Consoles have far better innovation in their games. On a pc you would be lucky to find a good game that isn't an fps. Not to mention if it was an fps the single player mode would be far better on a console. Any games online for consoles have next to no cheaters at all because other gamers cannot modify their games. Their are usually no bugs in games on consoles because of good playtesting so they require next to no patches to be able to play.

Good day sir.

[Y.T.]

Consoles have far better innovation in their games. On a pc you would be lucky to find a good game that isn't an fps.

You have no idea.
Ever heard about IL-2? Or, Operation Flashpoint?
Or, Jagged Alliance? Or Master of Orion ][?

Or the best tactical wargame ever..
Steel Panthers: World at War?

Most modern games are totally lame.
If you want a great game, you have to write it yourself.

[hanacker]

Their are usually no bugs in games on consoles because of good playtesting so they require next to no patches to be able to play.

But when there are bugs (and there almost always are at least some relatively minor ones) you're stuck with them forever.

[Bobbybirdtree]

Newer consoles have harddrives. ;) And zak i was speaking more in terms of story. None of those games are seriously deep or anything like that. No real plots. I don't really see a point in making a game if i know the ending. :(

[hapacheese]

Play Ico.


That is all.

[Bobbybirdtree]

Played it. Twice.

[hapacheese]

Twice?

Then I assume you enjoyed it :)

[D-pad]

Twice?

Then I assume you enjoyed it :)
I hated it........

[Bobbybirdtree]

You were probably about 11-12 when it came out so you probably didn't really "get" it.

[ChronoSphere]

I'm a gamer in general. If I have the cash, and I like it I'll buy it, PC, console, whatever. (I currently own all 3 current-gen consoles, and a gaming PC and a gaming laptop).

But I NEVER buy a console on the first run... I'm not just willing to burn $300 (now $400 if you want a non-gimped Xbox360) on a console. I'll wait till they do their first price drop next Xmas season. $400 is a helluva lot of money, and I'd rather not spend that.

[hapacheese]

It's interesting, really. And I mean this in as non-facetious a way as possible, but whenever talking about Ico, I've noticed that the younger gamers tend to dislike it, while older gamers tend to rave about it. I think it has to do with visual/interactive storytelling style of the game, versus the heavy exposition found in games like FF or MGS.

[Y.T.]

None of those games are seriously deep or anything like that. No real plots. I don't really see a point in making a game if i know the ending.
In those games, you create the stories.
That's all. A good game of Il-2 is very much a story.
If you have ten-twenty people, on two sides,
fighting an air-war, it's a story. There are winners and losers,
famous victories and ignoble defeats...

Master of Orion? Like, conquering a galaxy is not a story?
I don't get it ... Wiping out enemies, conquering star systems,
fighting decisive battles, making alliances?
Plotting to wipe out billions of people all the time...
Personal animosities? Well, you have to bring people
into the game, then it gets personal. The only game
I played was non-stop total war. Lost because
of one point..

[D-pad]

It's interesting, really. And I mean this in as non-facetious a way as possible, but whenever talking about Ico, I've noticed that the younger gamers tend to dislike it, while older gamers tend to rave about it. I think it has to do with visual/interactive storytelling style of the game, versus the heavy exposition found in games like FF or MGS.
I just hated it cause the contols where complex and the lighting effects where blinding as fuck.

[hahaman]

PS3

sure it cost more but the games on it are more enjoyable

XBOX

only if they had more games :( the only good game on it is halo

REVOLUTION

omg after the horror that was gamecube i don't want to touch anyhting made by nintendo

nothing good comes with cheap stuff

[hapacheese]

The controls were about as simple as they come. Attack, jump, call/interact with Yorda. Oh, and pick up object.

The lighting, well, it was an impressionistic art style. Most games, you look at the sun and you see a shiny thing, and a generic lens flare. Does that happen in real life? No, you go blind. They took that impression, and played around with it.

[Dead Sexy Vocab]

The PS3 Controller looks like a Boomerang.

[Xephon]

I'll end up most likely buying a PS3 and/or Revolution. Nothing against the 360, but so far, most of the games announced so far do not interest me, maybe except Perfect Dark and Halo 3, but that's it. I'll also be doing the smart thing and wait a few months, maybe even a year, till I buy a console.

[Dead Sexy Vocab]

Games to be looked forward for the Consoles:

Nintendo Revolution
-Super Smash Bros. Online
-That is all

PS3
-GTA?
-???

XBOX 360
-Halo 3

[Bliss]

360-
Lost Odyssey
Blue Dragon
Chrome Hounds
Halo 3
Perfect Dark
Gears of War
FFXI
Fable 2
Possibly KotOR III

Revolution-
Well, there will obviously be more good mario and zelda games.

PS3-
I dunno, not saying there arent any good games, I just don't know any.Fable

[moo]

omg after the horror that was gamecube i don't want to touch anyhting made by nintendo

nothing good comes with cheap stuff

Ive had mine for probably 4 years (dont remember but I have some 2k2 games, so that means approx 4 years give or take)
Never has given me any problems. Plays newer games better. I heard some shit how older model gc's cant play Re4. Mine only made me restart my gamcube 3 times when I was loading a game. So in my experience nintendo makes reliable systems(Also the fact that I can probably get my snes to work if I wanted to, along with my sisters n64)

[Elethiomel]

omg after the horror that was gamecube i don't want to touch anyhting made by nintendo

nothing good comes with cheap stuff

Nothing good?

Resident Evil 4
Skies of Arcadia Legends
Pikmin
Viewtiful Joe
Eternal Darkness
Super Mario Sunshine
SA2B
Cubivore
REmake
Wind Waker
Final Fantasy:Crystal Chronicles
Tales of Symphonia
Mario Kart
Metroid Prime
Paper Mario
MGS:Twin Snakes


I beg to differ.

[Pfalzer]

Thats a very small list compared to ps2 and xbox man. Not to say nintendo doesnt come out with good games ... its tht there marketing for all their games are for like 7 year olds they need to mature as a company especially for consoles. They are lacking in technology but excel in some kind of innovation...in spurts tht is... other than tht all they are doing is living off the fumes of the one market they control handhelds. They only control that market becuz they were they only real sucessful handheld maker for liek a decade. Now that sony has been thrown into the mix (Im sure microsoft will follow suit very very very soon) those promised sales will start to dwindle and nintendo will be in dire need of an upgrade which she unfortunately will not be able to pay for at tht time thus bringing in the victors sony and microsoft ergo the buying of nintendo shares ergo mario and zelda working for sony and microsoft...

[silentplummet]

Just how much gaming do you guys have time for?

I guess if you're chewing through video games at a pace of like five per week then by all means let that be your criterion for picking a console out of the next lineup, if you must have only one. But I would assume that most normal gamers wouldn't purchase more than 40 games in the useful life of their platform. [I take that number since that is roughly the number of games I came to own for the SNES, at the height of my gaming activity. I played more than anyone I personally knew at the time.]

Matter of fact, if you have such a voracious appetite for games I would suggest getting an emulator or two and availing yourself of the incalculably large library of games five or more years old which you can now have for free or nearly-free. Thanks to emulation I picked up on games which would have cost me several hundreds of dollars to play when they were new, assuming I could get access to them at all. Unlike most people I guess I do not see much of a correlation between the age of a game and the quality of that game.

Some good ones to go back and hit if you haven't yet:

Star Control II (PC/DOS, 1992)
Master of Magic (PC/DOS, 1995)
Ultima VI, VII, VIII (PC/DOS, 1990-94)
Bahamut Lagoon (SNES, 1996?)
Seiken Densetsu III ("Secret of Mana 2", SNES)
Tales of Phantasia (SNES)
Final Fantasy Tactics (PSX, 1997) Favorite game ever, unpopular and rare but will offer hundreds of hours of play time to the dedicated player

Hell, just dig around and see what you can find.

I don't have a counter-argument for Zakalwe. I guess if you're that concerned with the limitations of computer simulation, why are you playing computer games at all? Go get into paintball or something.

I for one am not terribly interested in the next console wave. How will these new machines make gaming more relevant to me? That's what I want to know. I've stopped caring about Final Fantasy 17 and Dead or Alive 34. I want to see some new ideas before I drop a chunk of change on transient entertainment, rather than old ideas with a pretty new graphical face.

[Artie]

Thats a very small list compared to ps2 and xbox man. Not to say nintendo doesnt come out with good games ... its tht there marketing for all their games are for like 7 year olds they need to mature as a company especially for consoles. They are lacking in technology but excel in some kind of innovation...in spurts tht is... other than tht all they are doing is living off the fumes of the one market they control handhelds. They only control that market becuz they were they only real sucessful handheld maker for liek a decade. Now that sony has been thrown into the mix (Im sure microsoft will follow suit very very very soon) those promised sales will start to dwindle and nintendo will be in dire need of an upgrade which she unfortunately will not be able to pay for at tht time thus bringing in the victors sony and microsoft ergo the buying of nintendo shares ergo mario and zelda working for sony and microsoft...

Wow, you just don't listen to logic do you? Sure, Nintendo doesn't make Final Fantasy 100 or Halo 29, yet that puts them into the "kiddie" market?

Then again, Nintendo is making the most profit, so I guess that's helping them this time, isn't it? ;)

[Pfalzer]

not helping but making them able to call themselves a company ;) beside sspac emonkies dont have to listen to reason or intelligence for tht matter!

[Citizen]

But I would assume that most normal gamers wouldn't purchase more than 40 games in the useful life of their platform.

It's all about variety.

It's better to be able to say "I picked these twenty games because they were my favorites out of the hundreds of good games to choose from." than "I picked these twenty games because they're all that the consol had to offer.".


Final Fantasy Tactics (PSX, 1997) Favorite game ever, unpopular

Oh God, that's a good one. Tell another. With a comedy act like that, you could kill on the road. :D


I've stopped caring about Final Fantasy 17 and Dead or Alive 34. I want to see some new ideas before I drop a chunk of change on transient entertainment, rather than old ideas with a pretty new graphical face.

Indeed.

[Rogue_7]

heh, well considering I started playing Dead or Alive with DOA Ultimate, its not like I'm sick of it yet. Though honestly there is only one sequal game right now that I need to get my hands on, and thats Star Craft II. So what if its unannounced, we all know blizzard is working on something besides the WOW expansion. PC gaming forever!

[silentplummet]

Oh God, that's a good one. Tell another. With a comedy act like that, you could kill on the road. :D


I'm unsure what you're trying to say. Are you telling me the game got popular while I wasn't looking? It's been 7 years now so I guess anything could happen, but...

[Citizen]

I'm unsure what you're trying to say. Are you telling me the game got popular while I wasn't looking? It's been 7 years now so I guess anything could happen, but...

Yeah. Very popular. It, along with FFIV and FFVI are considered to be, and actually are, the best games in the series. Followed by FFI and FFIII.

They don't enjoy the same idotic/rampant fanboyism that the lesser FF games like FFVII and FFVIII get, but rampant fanboyism isn't really a good thing anyways.

[Y.T.]

I don't have a counter-argument for Zakalwe. I guess if you're that concerned with the limitations of computer simulation, why are you playing computer games at all? Go get into paintball or something.

Simulations are getting better and better.
Besides, paintball guns have no range. Though, I might
get to play it more.

I don't like games with scripted scenarios.
The only one I kind of liked, except FPS shooters(though, even there,
UT is my favourite) was BG I,II, and Albion. The plots were good, although,
it was all scripted and very bounded. Little freedom.
You can't fully express yourself, if you can't do things that
the game designer had not expected.

[Arctic_Slicer]

Then again, Nintendo is making the most profit, so I guess that's helping them this time, isn't it?

We are talking about the console market and in the console market Nintendo is flailing badly. They haven't been on top in the console market since the late 80s with the Nintendo Entertainment System. The Super Nintendo was outsold by genesis by a 2-1 ratio and the N64 living in the past with cartridges had no 3rd party developers and was overshadowed by the Playstation and Dreamcast. The gamecube is currently only make about 15% of console sales which is like 1/3 of what ps2 and is and 1/2 of xbox so no I wouldn't say that Nintendo profits are very relevant to the console discussion. The 3rd party developers will see these numbers and look to Sony and Microsoft for their support as they have proven themselves to be a more profitable venture.

If it wasn't for the success of "Pokemon" red and green that gave Nintendo a strong hold on the handheld gaming industry they wouldn't be making any considerable profits right now at all. Even then I am not sure that talk about Nintendo making more profit than Sony and Microsoft holds much water because last time I checked Sony and Microsoft were on the list of 100 biggest coporations in the world. I don't see Nintendo anywhere near there ranks in that regard either. Really if Nintendo didn't have a game designer named Satoshi Tajiri they would have went the way of Sega with less profitable results.

[Elethiomel]

http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzyb.php
An article that Arctic may find interesting.

[Artie]

http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzyb.php
An article that Arctic may find interesting.

Finally, I was looking for that.

thanks~

[TygressVirgo]

quick question, and then i'll bring up another thought,

ninetendo is a company that only deals in gaming systems, right?

[Artie]

quick question, and then i'll bring up another thought,

ninetendo is a company that only deals in gaming systems, right?

Yes, unlike Microsoft and Sony.

[silentplummet]

A portion of the price of nearly every PC sold today goes straight to Microsoft for inclusion of Windows XP. When you bought that laptop from Dell or Toshiba, Microsoft Windows was preinstalled, and even if the first thing you do is wipe the hard drive clean and drop Linux or BSD on it, you have still paid homage to Mr. Gates.

We call this the "Microsoft Tax" and in my estimation it is the primary cause of big MS' success. It is a situation possible only when a company drives all other companies out of competition and becomes the de facto standard. Microsoft can then leverage its position to include a copy of Windows Whatever on every PC ever sold, everywhere, because Joe Sixpack is not going to buy a PC without an operating system. Even if he had the wherewithal so to do, it is nearly impossible these days.

We call this a "monopoly" and in the United States such a business is operating illegally. It is because of this that the Xbox has succeeded thus far. Not because of Halo, and not because OMG NINTNEDO IS KIDDYZ. Microsoft may be the only corporation in the world which could afford to sustain the Xbox platform at such staggering losses.

[Kos]

We call this a "monopoly" and in the United States such a business is operating illegally. It is because of this that the Xbox has succeeded thus far. Not because of Halo, and not because OMG NINTNEDO IS KIDDYZ. Microsoft may be the only corporation in the world which could afford to sustain the Xbox platform at such staggering losses.

Operating a monopoly in the United States is not illegal. Once a company is recognized as a monopoly, there are additional rules and laws that apply to the monopoly.

To give an example from a current case (AMD vs. Intel), one of AMD's accusations is that Intel utilizes exclusive volume deals to OEMs - buy x number of processors, receive y% discount; If an OEM limits their shipment of AMD-based systems to (say) 15% or less of total systems that an OEM ships, that OEM receives additional pricebreaks / rebates.

AMD is not a monopoly, and can engage in these kinds of deals (due to limited marketshare and market penetration); Intel cannot (as a monopoly) legally engage in deals like these.

An additional constraint of being a monopoly is that a company cannot utilize its power in one market to gain marketshare in another, unrelated market. This was the gist of the argument that Netscape brought against Microsoft - that Microsoft was a maker of computer operating systems, and was using their leverage in that market (by tying/bundling and predatory deals) to gain a monopoly position in another market (web browsers).

[silentplummet]

An additional constraint of being a monopoly is that a company cannot utilize its power in one market to gain marketshare in another, unrelated market. This was the gist of the argument that Netscape brought against Microsoft - that Microsoft was a maker of computer operating systems, and was using their leverage in that market (by tying/bundling and predatory deals) to gain a monopoly position in another market (web browsers).

Like for instance jumping into the console market at a prolonged and disgusting loss?

Speaking of which, think Microsoft didn't use its sway in the computer market to get a better bargain for itself on the price of manufacturing each Xbox? You may recall that originally they were going to use the faster and more thermally efficient AMD processor until a very short time before the console launched, when Intel just happened to cut prices on specifically their 633 MHz part which was then included in the Xbox.

Edit: it may have been 833 MHz, I can't honestly recall that detail.

[Kos]

Like for instance jumping into the console market at a prolonged and disgusting loss?

Speaking of which, think Microsoft didn't use its sway in the computer market to get a better bargain for itself on the price of manufacturing each Xbox?

Microsoft's loss on the Xbox was mostly due to the licensing deal with NVidia (royalty payments on every single NV2A fabbed), from what I understand. Additionally, Microsoft did not (for once) attempt to leverage their pre-existing monopolies (operating systems, or office) to gain marketshare.

There was no deal (that I can remember) of Microsoft giving away either (1) a free Xbox with a purchase of Windows, or (2) a licensed copy of Office or Windows with the purchase of an Xbox. As for contracts for Xbox manufacturing, we don't know - still not illegal (I think).

Look at it this way; Netscape used to sell Navigator for revenue, Microsoft tied Internet Explorer to Windows - and made agreements with OEMs that IE was to be the only browser on the desktop, unless those OEMs wanted to pay the full (consumer) price for each copy of Windows.

Think we should move this to PM, and try to stay on topic? :)

[silentplummet]

nah, I'm done.

[Mr.Babalo]

i love the article on nintendo making the most profit. thanks.

[Arctic_Slicer]

http://nintendoinsider.com/site/EEEZuAypVuTuOJPzyb.php
An article that Arctic may find interesting.

Even that article said that the handhelds were very important to Nintendo's success. It also didn't say Nintendo was the most profitable company only the most profitable % in video games. Sony and Microsoft are two of the biggest corporations in the world and the vast majority of their profits are not made on video games. It also talked about how Nintendo not trying to "revolutionize" what a gaming console is and sticking to games was better than worrying about dvd playback and online compatibility. They have either changed their conservative ways or their claims of their upcomming console to be a "revolution" in gaming is total bullshit. Honestly though I don't think a gaming console could survive in this day and age without an internet capabilities. Considering that new president of Nintendo claimed that online gaming wasn't important I wouldn't expect their next system to support online gaming like the other systems would unless of course Nintendo is no longer the conservative company they once were. It takes more than 115 years of history and reputation to be successful. I would expect Nintendo be more focused on handhelds than home consoles as they have a much stronger market in the handhelds.

If Nintendo has changed this drastically in business practices then it certainally wouldn't be a bad move to make a system that is superior to the other ones. If they can promise a system that is superior to the other ones they may prevent people from buying the other ones to wait it out for the more promising revolution. Remember the Dreamcast that launched in 1998? It broke all kinds of records when it launched and had very strong sells early on however the announcement of the more promising playstation 2 caused alot of people to put console purchases on hold to wait for the superior ps2. The annoucement of the playstation 2 was literally the biggest factor that caused dreamcast sells to tank. So it isn't too farfetched for the above scenario from the last generation to happen again during this generation. Really though the failure of the Dreamcast is in many ways one of the best things that ever happened to Sega as Sega is no bigger than ever.