Slashdot Mirror
Next-Gen Console Rumors Summarized, Discussed
Thanks to GameSpy for their article discussing available information and prospects for Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo's next generation of consoles. Regarding Sony's PlayStation 3, the piece notes: "May 2004's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) would seem an appropriate time for the PS3 unveiling, but it's unlikely that Sony will want to steal the thunder from its already-scheduled PlayStation Portable (PSP) unveiling", and also muses that "Nintendo's next-gen machine doesn't even have a good moniker yet, as it's unlikely that it'll want to name it after the underperforming GameCube." As for the alleged Xbox Next, the article suggests: "Jostling with Nintendo for the second-place spot worldwide, Microsoft has a bit more [motivation] than Sony to tip its hand early", and claims news of the device is "set to debut at the San Jose Game Developers Conference (GDC) in March 2004." But do those who unveil and launch their consoles first always get the advantage?
Sony's specialized parts ensured that Sony owned all of the rights. Sony's intimate knowledge of the parts and the manufacturing has allowed them to combine silicon, cutting down on overall size and costs. Likewise, the only profittaking is from Sony, and with fewer hands in the pot the margins can be shrunk. Unfortunately for Microsoft, using off-the-shelf parts from different manufacturers ensured that they needed the cooperation (and credits) from different companies. Nvidia, for example, gets a cut on the sales of the hardware, not from the software like ATI gets from Nintendo. Microsoft similarly needs to use faster hardware in their machines as they aren't exactly console-optimized. The 'Cube, again, can get away with running on much slower (read, cheaper) hardware, because it would be a terrible webserver. Say what you will about the XBox OS, it's hardware and interfaces were not originally developed with gaming in mind.
On the other hand, the success of the PS2 can probably be traced to GT3, GTA, Square, Metal Gear Solid 2, Onimusha, and a host of must-have games that were released before the Xbox hit its stride. People buy games and hardware to play those games, not hardware and games to play on that hardware.
Why must the media constantly downplay the gamecube? It is not exactly performing poorly and it is not for lack of good games. Is it because "edgy" titles such as GTA: Vice City and Manhunt are not released for it? Perhaps it is too "cute"?
As I just wrote in my journal today I predict that what Nintendo will anounce is a portable gamecube that uses the same media. Perfectly possible and it would give the PSP something serious to think about given that there is already a stack of GC software out there. Add in the Gameboy player and you're really cooking.
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
Systems that are first to launch are not always the winner. In reality, was PS2 really the first to launch? Yes... if you mean the first of the current systems still in production. But wasn't Dreamcast considered part of this generation? I believe it was a 128-bit system and its capabilities whipped the pants off of PS1 and N64. And look where it is now [in America, at least].
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
I think so. That is the only reason the PS2 has an advantage over the XBOX, is because it was released 1 1/2 years before the XBOX. Basically, the PS2 had many gamers already when the XBOX came out. The XBOX is a far superior console compared to the PS2, although it is battling for the number 2 spot with Nintendo's Gamecube. Timing is everything, and being established in the market. I think it is safe to say XBOX has now established itself, Sony already has along with Nintendo.
The only hard 'fact' in those 3 pages is that the PS3 will use 'CELL' technology. Other than that there's just speculation that the XBox 2 might not have a hard drive, some more Sony marketing hyperbole (PS3 will be 1000 times faster!), and the requisite Nintendo questioning.
There was absolutely nothing in that article to make it worth reading. Of course, it was on GameSpy, so that's not too surprising.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
For me, it's always been about the games. It's why I have the GameCube now, and more than likely it'll be why I get the next Nintendo console in the next generation, unless Nintendo hardware goes the way of the dodo and starts publishing titles for the PS3, which I really, really, really doubt.
MORTAR COMBAT!
It seems that the folks who are adamant about the GC and its games have always been big Nintendo fans. Many folks who are not on the GC bandwagon have many thoughts they claim as the reason (games too cutesy, not enough games, crappy hardware, etc.) It all reminds me of Apple using folks. They tend to be Apple users through out. Die hard even. Maybe there is a correlation between GC lovers and Apple lovers. hmmm.....
Sony's intimate knowledge of the parts and the manufacturing has allowed them to combine silicon, cutting down on overall size and costs. Likewise, the only profittaking is from Sony, and with fewer hands in the pot the margins can be shrunk. Unfortunately for Microsoft, using off-the-shelf parts from different manufacturers ensured that they needed the cooperation (and credits) from different companies. Nvidia, for example, gets a cut on the sales of the hardware, not from the software like ATI gets from Nintendo. Microsoft similarly needs to use faster hardware in their machines as they aren't exactly console-optimized. The 'Cube, again, can get away with running on much slower (read, cheaper) hardware, because it would be a terrible webserver. Say what you will about the XBox OS, it's hardware and interfaces were not originally developed with gaming in mind.
You're forgetting (or didn't know) a few things about the XBox hardware, though. The CPU, motherboard, video, and sound were modified and/or designed for the XBox. In fact, nVidia gets as big a cut of the XBox as it does because it designed the motherboard (a derivative of which became the nForce, which, oddly enough, was originally for AMD chips). The CPU was modified heavily in it's design not only to fit the specs for the chipset, but also to fit the needs of a console. All of this is why Microsoft has been able to reduce manufacturing costs on the console, but at the same time their payments to nVidia and Intel have not changed, thereby sticking them with a rather large percentage of the manufacturing cost going to those two companies. This is, as you hinted with statements about Sony, why MS announced that they are licensing technology from IBM, which should lead more people to believe they will be manufacturing the processors themselves (or outsourcing it) rather than having IBM produce processors for them as Intel does for the current XBox.
On the other hand, the success of the PS2 can probably be traced to GT3, GTA, Square, Metal Gear Solid 2, Onimusha, and a host of must-have games that were released before the Xbox hit its stride. People buy games and hardware to play those games, not hardware and games to play on that hardware.
Certainly for me it was a mix of Square, GT3, GTA3, and Tekken, not to mention backwards compatibility. That being said, I was not an early adopter of the PS2, and was disappointed with it's performance relative to the DreamCast which I had purchased shortly after release in 1999.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
The fact is, the age of the average gamer has risen to 29 yrs old.. and their games are still targeted for kids.. If they continue to do this, theres no way they can surpass xbox and needless-to-say ps2..
Btw.. have you ever noticed that most of the Gameboy Advanced print ads feature adults?
I for one welcome our new videogame makers overlords! May their conglomerate business anger do not fall upon us!!
After the obligatory joke, I wish to say that is another reason (apart from excellent games) to support Nintendo. You don't want only one company owning all electronic media, be it a japanese (Sony) or American (Microsoft).
We want to play games.
Games aren't original; hardware is. PS2 games are largely the same games we've always played our whole lives. The fun of buying a console vs the emulator is the ability to play on that hardware, using neato controllers. I buy the hardware so I can play games on the hardware. Otherwise, I'd just wait another 5 or so years, get a PS2 emulator, and download ROMs like mad. But I don't want to play those games on my PC. I want to play them on my PS2 hardware.
There are definitely a few innovations, I admit, like GTA:VC, and the newish kinetic/rhythm genre i.e. Amplitude/Frequency/DDR/Eye Toy. But in the examples of DDR and the Eye Toy -- people buy hardware so that they can play a game on that hardware.
When I bought 2 forcefeedback steering wheels for my console, I didn't buy them "to play a game". I bought them to use the steering wheels. I didn't even have a game in mind. (Though, now, it is Burnout 2!)
So.. I have to disagree, for me personally at least.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Nintendo's next-gen machine doesn't even have a good moniker yet, as it's unlikely that it'll want to name it after the underperforming GameCube.
Except for the fact that the Xbox is "underperforming" just as much as the GC and MS will indeed name their next console after the Xbox, so I don't see how naming it after the Gamecube would be such a bad thing (though I'd like to see them name it the NES 5, personally).
Frankly, I think the next gen systems are going to be rather underwhelming. The transition from 64 to 128 bit for Sony took a bit of time, as plenty of good games were still released for the PS1, and the first genration for the PS2 was rather underwhelming. (For the most part. Sony got lucky I think).
Every new hardware generation needs a "Killer App.". From the 2600 to the NES, the Killer App was SMB/Mega Man/Side Scrollers. From the NES to the SNES/Genesis, the killer apps were the increased graphical prowness, SMW and Sonic. Then there was the turn at 32/64 bit. For the N64, it was 3d adventures. For the PS1, it was first the arcade ports. That never really caught on. The big killer app was Final Fantasy VII, of course.
When it jumped from PS1 to PS2, the Dreamcast, first, never really had anything to really vault itself. Soul Calibur was great, but the genre was already done on the PS1. It was technically brilliant, but didn't add too much.
My argument is that the killer app on the PS2 is actually a rather overlooked game.
Dynasty Warriors 2.
That really introduced the idea of being overwhelmed in an action game. Not for consumers, but for developers, I think it opened a lot of eyes towards what could be done on the hardware.
Until they have something to launch this on the new hardware, I think that the focus will be on the current generation.
Personally I'm not even close to reaching that point where I feel the possibilities are limited (in terms of games, graphics, etc). I remember reaching those points on the N64, the SNES, the NES... but right now I'm still very happy with the games coming out for my PS2 and 'Cube. So...
When do we need the next console exactly?
Sega ships the Saturn before Sony ships the PS1 -- Sega gets dominated (despite the fact that the Saturn was a superior console in terms of hardware).
Sega then ships the Dreamcast a whole year before the PS2, and gets trounced once again.
I suppose it could be partly blamed on bad marketing, but the real problem was that Sega never had any real franchise titles on the Saturn or Dreamcast (despite the Sonic rehashes). Sony will dominate for years to come, simply because they have the best titles -- the FF and GTA series' alone will sell millions of PS3 boxes.
Basically the comments after each section boil down to "we hate nintendo" - I just don't get it. I don't hope any one company succeeds or fails, I will buy a product that appeals to me [unless it made by microsoft :)] I recently got a gmaecube (I haven't purchase any of this generation's consoles till now) and I did so because it beat the others on price, and on games. The games I want to play are on the GC and I think its because I want to play fun games, not games that throw in violence or sex so they can be 'mature'. (although my first few purchases have had some misteps, "Super Smash Bros. Melee" anyone ?)
I also think the GC joystick design blows away the competition and I hope nintendo sticks with it. But if their next system sucks I wont want it, even if everyone else does, and the same goes for sony.
I just don't get why all the press recently has been so anti-nintendo, it is sort-of like the anti-Howard Dean press, where is very obvious the Republicans are pushing the 'un-electable' angle as hard as they can so that it sticks before he even gets the nomination. Why are game writers so anti nintendo? the game cube is a nice little device and the games they put out are typiclly very high quality.
MS has already said that Xbox2 will NOT be backwards compatible.
While I only happen to own Nintendo consoles, I don't have much experience with backwards compatability (except for a few old gameboy puzzle games and Mario Tennis which I still play on the GBA), I do have experience with the "ultimate" backwards-compatible machine... the PC. I fire up Civ II, Warcraft II, old King's Quests and Lucasarts games at least once a year.
Backwards compatability rules. PS3 is already announced to be backwards compatible, and Iwata-San has already confirmed in an interview with Famatsu that N5 will backwards compatable too. Big mistake (IMO) Bill...
"Say what you will about the XBox OS, it's hardware and interfaces were not originally developed with gaming in mind."
Seeing as how the XBOX is much more impressive graphically than the PS2, it's hard to take the 'not originally developed with gaming in mind' comment too seriously.
"Derp de derp."
On the other hand, the success of the PS2 can probably be traced to GT3, GTA, Square, Metal Gear Solid 2, Onimusha, and a host of must-have games that were released before the Xbox hit its stride.
The PS2's success didn't have to do with big games. There really weren't any big games for the PS2 until about a year after the PS2's launch - about the same time as the GameCube and Xbox launched. By then, PS2 sales were already about what current Xbox and GameCube sales combined are.
Other than Halo, the Xbox has had very few games to really drive the system sales. Yes, it has some good games, but not standout games. You can get things like good racers for every system.
The GameCube's failure is due to Nintendo waiting until a year after launch to start bringing out their big names - Mario, Zelda, and Metroid. While Metroid came out far better than anyone expected, Mario and Zelda greatly underachieved. Mario Sunshine was very good, but it's rather short if you don't count the very tedious finding blue coins portion of the game. Zelda had the difficulty toned down way too much, and was also very linear (the non-linearity of past Zelda games was a huge factor in what made them so good).
The stuff the Sony marketroids hand out, no doubt.
When will you idiots learn that the PS2 is a 32-bit console, just like everyone other console out there right now (with the exception of the Jaguar and N64, and look where they are now)
I don't know how console gamers got the idea that more bits = better system: sure this was important back in the days of the 6502, the jump in bits (NES->SNES, Master System->Genesis) was a jump in generations.
The truth is nobody really needs more than a 32-bit integer these days. The systems have FAR less RAM than can be addressed as such. So we have two generations of systems now with the same number of bits per GP register in your CPUs.
No, sadly, the marketroids continuted to push this insane notion of doubling of bits = generation jump, and scrambled to find places inside the system ANYWHERE where a larger bit register could be found so they could say "AHA! Look, our system has more bits!!!"
In the case of the PS2, this would be the 128-bit wide support in the emotion engine. Never mind that no actual 128-bit operations occur in there, just dual 64 or quad 32 bit ops in parallel.
By this logic, my desktop PC with SSE2 extensions in the CPU is also 128-bit.
No, the PS2 has a lowly (480MHz!) 32-bit RISC-based (R3000?) CPU at it's heart. So pedestrian.
Hell Nintendo went BACKWARDS. They had an expensive MIPS R90 (real 64-bit) chip in the N64, and then went to the much faster G3 (32bit-PPC@400MHz) in the GameCube. One of these systems doesn't suffer from slowdown...
I think you're stretching the killer app idea. Most systems debut with a game that's clearly NOT possible on the previous hardware as a technology demo. A year of refinement in learning how to develop for the platform will reveal "deal-breakers" for people who hold out from buying it at first release.
For example:
Gamecube's "tech demo" would be Luigi's Mansion.
The deal breaker was Double Dash.
PS/2's "tech demo" would be Gran Tourismo A-Spec.
The deal breaker was GTA3.
X-Box's "tech demo" would be Halo.
X-Box's deal breaker was Halo.
Heh.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I'm not saying that the original poster was correct in his statement. In fact, it sounds quite foolish to think that a video game console was designed with something other than gaming in mind. [And of course, the poster offers no evidence.] But your counter to that statement is weak, at best.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
In case you don't actually pay attention to FF news as devotedly as fanboys like me, whatever rift existed between Nintendo and Square has been healed, and new FF games (after XII, most likely, since it's already in development--but what do I know?) will probably come to Nintendo's consoles as well. Crystal Chronicle (not a numbered FF, but an FF, nonetheless) is already out for GC/GBA.
Of course, I'm sticking with my PS2, and 3 when it comes out, or more likely a year or 2 after :-)
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
"May 2004's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) would seem an appropriate time for the PS3 unveiling"
No, it wouldn't. That time would be 2005. The cycle between consoles otherwise is 5 years. When did they last have complete hardware to show in North America? At E3 2000. When did the PS2 release? Fall 2000.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
What a incompetent bunch of assholes who lick dicks of slashdot editors to get their predictions and FUD posted here as news.
If they were in any way serious about their intend to inform people of the quality of a system they wouldn't need to let console systems look bad because they didn't sell well. I don't give a shit about how well my console sells to other people. I care about good games. And the Gamecube certainly has a LOT of good games.
Gamespy completely fails to inform. All they do is spreading the shit little fanboys write in their forums.
"Uhhh... I've heard Nintendo is cute and their stock quotes are low!!! Their games must suck!!!"
Fuck them and their shit. Gamespy is a place for assholes.
BTW I'm not justifying my Gamecube purchase here. I've got a PS2, too. XBox? Ok, I have no XBox.. Fuck that crap!
294MHz R4000 MIPS.
It's the GameCube with the 486MHz G3.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
[ob-bleat]
I was irked when reading digitaltaco's comments. he's constantly referring to the CURRENT generation of consoles as NEXT-GEN.
A lot of people do this and it's stupid.
[/ob-bleat]
However, the rest of the article was spot on. Amid the complaints and disbelief that the next Xbox will possibly ship without a hard drive, I think that it's a smart move.
First - what is the hard drive used for? (other than by people who hack it to put linux on it):
- saving games
- game updates via Xbox Live
- MP3s.
Game saves aren't that big. In fact, every single one of my games tells me I still have 50000+ blocks free.
I'm unsure how big Live updates for games are, but surely they wouldn't go over a few hundred megs per game over the lifetime of a game.
As for MP3s, I don't even know how this is done. Is it possible without hacking the Xbox? Can it be done while retaining a playable Xbox still usable with Live?
I think the best solution is memory cards. Either removable solid state drives, or flash cards. The capacity of Flash Cards and Memory Sticks these days will allow people to have a few of them usable with updatable Live games. The only problem is the cost of the cards.
Microsoft will have to weigh up the cost vs size/portability/weight of the console as a whole.
But that doesn't mean they can't put in a 3.5" drive with 5-10 gigs....They could even make the drives removable.
I like smaller, lighter consoles, but I'd hate to pay $200 per gig of memory cards, even if it did support full updates for 4-5 games, plus several other saves...
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
" can compare an Atari 2600 to whatever modern computer you want and the graphics on the computer will be superior - even though that computer wasn't built with gaming in mind [we'll say it was assembled to be a web server.] You see the trouble with your rationale?"
No, not really. Don't get me wrong, I see what you're saying, but it doesn't prove my statement is 'weak at best'. If the result is that it does what people buy it to do, it's hard to take the "it's not designed with gaming in mind" very seriously. Games are about the result, not the journey getting there. XBOX's could be sold with vaccuum tubes in the hardware, if it still produces pleasing results, then why is that statement very relevant?
Just so you know, I *am* listening, so please don't feel the need to put me in my place. I'd much rather have a thoughtful discussion here than an argument.
"Derp de derp."
a lot of people are whining about backwards compatibility being important. but realistically, how many owners of PS2s are still buying PS1 games? A few, but not many. Once they see games on the PS2, they don't want blocky PS1 games...
How many Nintendo consoles have offered backwards compatibility? The Gameboys. Gamecube has a completely different type of media. Usually Nintendo have stuck to carts, but they're on proprietary CDs.
People are still buying their new games. People aren't complaining that they can't plug their N64 games and their SNES games into the cube...
Same for Xbox. New architecture will just mean a new box. Who gives a toss iff it can't play old Xbox games? Your old Xbox will do that.
If you don't have a current-gen Xbox when the next-gen is released, you're not going to go out and buy old Xbox games. They'll be too blocky, or too low-res.
You'll move on. And you'll accept that.
Don't impel the designers of the next-gen consoles to add backwards compatibility that you won't ACTUALLY use.
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
Do you think I care whether or not I'm a software pirate? Or what others think? Because I have yet to hear of someone getting busted for installing Xbox games to their (upgraded) +100gb Xbox hard disk. Not only can I play bootlegged games, I can watch the latest movie rips.
He was referring to PC hardware in general. The x86 architecture... Of course the frame buffers used were created with games in mind, but the basic machine architecture was not.
This includes other things like hard drives, CD-ROMs, etc. Cartridges may have been designed with games in mind because of their quick load times, but HDs and CDs weren't. They're just cheap hardware utilised in a console - but they weren't developed with gaming in mind.
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
You are an anomaly.
Yes. Though I knew this already. I'm an anamoly in just about every area possible.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
The big problem I had with Zelda were the long and tedious parts waiting for the boat to reach the next island you want to go to. Even when you could warp to areas you still often had to point the boat in the direction you wanted to go then sail for a minute to get there. :( Personally I'd have just liked to have seen the islands closer together to cut down on travel times.
People buy games and hardware to play those games, not hardware and games to play on that hardware.
:)
I must say, slightly offtopic, this is the first time I've caught someone quoting me in a public forum. You've just made my day.
- Chris Canfield
The ______ Agenda
The VU0/1 chips have 128-bit wide registers, but they aren't doing 128-bit ops. They do quad 32-bit integer/fp ops in parallel. The 4th core is the generic FPU which crunches 64-bit floats.
But the primary core, which does the integer and branching logic, controls all the other cores, schedules the DMA, etc. etc. is 32-bit through and through. Also, note all cores operate on 32-bit addresses.
If that makes it 128-bit (or even 64-bit), then the 387 coprocessor upgrade made the 1980's era 386SX 64-bit.
Which it didn't.
Which means you're WRONG. When will you accept that?
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
How dare you point out logical flaws in my rant!
>_;;;
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I mean, look at this :
up to 1000 times as fast as the PS2. What that means in real-world terms remains to be seen. We suspect that backwards compatibility is unlikely.
With that much hyped power, I can't understand why gamespy couldn't even think about emulation.
Oh wait, I forgot...
Anyone believing something as stupid as "1000 times as powerfull as a playstation 2, and there will be 4 of them in the box" should be shot. If they made a joke about it, it'd be fine. But they just said it. I just wish they'd go bankrupt.
Since you're such a smarty pants... Why did they bother using 128-bit registers in the primary core to transfer to VU0... why not schedule it to R/W from the cache itself? Cut down on the duplicate memory controller logic?
It seems a round-about way of doing things unless you can also use it to read/write to each of the 4 quads.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
That was >_<;;;
I'll admit, I do look sexy with bandages. But that wasn't the intent.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
But do those who unveil and launch their consoles first always get the advantage?
No. For references, please see entries for Sega Saturn and Dreamcast. Next question.
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...
I hope Nintendo will call their next console the 'N5'. I think it's a pretty kick-ass name, it's like a testament of Nintendo's heritage, plus it's short and sweet.
I read this and realized the article has nothing interesting to say. The fact that PS3 isn't even confirmed for the CELL chip yet (which was the first spec released!) is proof enough that it is far from a "sure thing."
What's non-linear about previous Zelda games? If anything they're all far more linear than the design suggests - if you have seven medallions to collect, you might think you can go after them in any order, but no, you have to go get them in the order the designers wanted.
Zelda has never been anything but linear. It's just that previous titles had more in the way of minigames and side quests.
The fun of buying a console vs the emulator is the ability to play on that hardware, using neato controllers.
Um, just about every console controller ever released can be plugged into a PC with the right adaptor and used with any emulator you care to mention. In the process you generally get better graphics and enhanced functionality (fast-forward, save states).
Sure, there's a bit of a wait involved, but now that PS1 emulation is approaching perfection I doubt I'll ever plug my PS1 in again. PS2 emulation is just starting to run commercial games, so I guess it'll be a year or so before I put that console away.
because most 3rd party developers have walked away from the GC.
simple as that.
3rd party developer interest is the key indicator into console health, and the GameCube doesn't have much, if any, left.
consider the dreamcast. it had some fantastic games. it wasn't too far behind the ps and n64 after a year or two of release - but it was still dead in the water because 3rd party developers didn't consider it worth the risk. it continued to have some really great games released for it - but the overall trend was what mattered.
nintendo's situation isn't quite as desperate, but it's certainly similar.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
All of them support decent fillrates, with varying levels of support for vertex and/or texel ops to do any necessary special effects.
Not all of them are using ansiotropic texture filtering (I think only the XBox can), but that hasn't left an impression on me, especially since 99% of installations are with NTSC sets, so you can't tell anyway.
At this point, the quality of the graphics are in the hands of the game designers, and if it looks crappy, it's probably not a limitation of the system, but the designers inability to effectively use it.
Clearly the grandparent has only been playing games that were ported to the PS2, and not developed FOR it.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Play Zelda 1. There's very little forced linearity to it.
You have to get the raft from level 3 to get to 4, and you have to get the ladder from level 4 to make it through the levels after it. And you have to get the flute from level 5 to get to level 7. You also have to beat 1 thru 8 before you can enter 9. That's all that's forced. For example, I just beat Zelda 1 again last week. I did the levels in the order 1, 3, 2, 4, 5, 8, 7, 6, 9.
Wind Waker was clearly designed to be non-linear. When you are told about the last 2 dungeons, you are given no indication you have to do them in order. And when you play through them, you'll realize that nothing in the levels requires them to be beat in order. But the guy who lets you into the second level won't show up until you beat the first. It could've been even better if they continued with the non-linearity - there were originally supposed to be more levels in the game, but they were cut due to time constraints. The most obvious cut is the level before talking to Jabun.
I'm not sure how linear Zelda 3 is; the only thing I'm certain of is that you can beat the level where you get the staff that creates blocks before you beat the ice level.
In Majora's Mask, the real game is the side quests, not the dungeons, and that stuff is very largely non-linear.
On the other hand, the success of the PS2 can probably be traced to GT3, GTA, Square, Metal Gear Solid 2, Onimusha, and a host of must-have games that were released before the Xbox hit its stride.
Personally, I have never liked Sony as a company, their practices, or their gaming consoles. I really don't understand why Microsoft doesn't just buy Rockstar and Square, and put an end to this once & for all.
Except that Microsoft, themselves, have pretty much said that the Xbox is a trojan, designed to get the Microsoft name into the living room. The Xbox is far more successful than their previous attempts at controlling the living room: Ultimate TV and WebTV (now MSN TV).
Look at the Xbox Music Mixer, which allows karoke use; file sharing of music and movie files from a PC and Xbox; etc. That's not meant for gaming in the least; but it is probably hoped to be the tojan that gets the Xbox into Japanese homes (where karoke is very popular).
But, the Xbox Music Mixer shows that Microsoft never intended the Xbox to be just a game machine, even though they originally said it was just a game machine. The Xbox is designed to be their gateway into controlling the 'Digital Entertainment Lifestyle' (hey, they coined the phrase, not me).
I fully expect the next Xbox to have Ultimate TV built in, as well as possibly MSN TV. Games will end up being the byproduct, not the main focus. The main focus will be in controlling the living room like they control the PC OS industry.
But the guy who lets you into the second level won't show up until you beat the first.
This isn't true. I've finished the game twice now, and I completed the Earth Shrine first in the first game, and the Wind Shrine first in the second game. Nothing in the Earth Shrine requires you to use the Hookshot, and nothing in the Wind Shrine requires you to use the Mirror Shield. The fact that you didn't see the "guy" (I assume you mean the tree sprite) probably just meant that you already had the Rito with you - Once you've picked up one, you have to go with that one to completion. Can't have them both on the boat, nope nope nope.
As for Zelda:LttP, you're correct, in that you don't have to do the Ice Tower at any particular point, despite it being #5 in the series, and the fact that the Cane of Somaria helps greatly in the SNES version (the puzzle was modified in the GBA version).
And, for the sake of information, in OoT, you can do the Spirit Temple or the Shadow Temple in either order - The Spirit Temple can be completed without the Hover Boots, to my knowledge. Even if you did need them, though, you receive them fairly early on in the Shadow Temple, and you can stop right there and head straight for the Gerudo Desert and finish the Spirit Temple.
And since I've recently started replaying Zelda II, nothing in the game requires you to complete a temple before moving on - You simply need the appropriate items/skills to progress. If you're a glutton for punishment, you can totally skip over the temple in Parapa Desert, as the Candle is a non-essential item. You do eventually have to finish it of course.
I'm actually pretty patient, but I would not want to be waiting this long to be playing PS2 games. Most of the fun (for me) is playing vs other people, and people don't want to play 4-year-old games. Plus they'll have had more practice and whip my ass!
An emulator will outlive a console in general terms, but will require maintenance whereas a console generally wont.
A console gets instant results and lasts as long as the hardware lasts. But applications do not necessarily last as long as the hardware lasts.
(Example, I had to drop many of my favorite .EXE and .COM 1980s utilities when I upgraded to Win95, even though it was the same hardware, whereas a PS2 "utility" [ie the sharkport cd] will work forever. And my favorite screensaver ever, luminati.exe, will only run on dos boxes. Same hardware, diff OS, can't do it. Not saying that would happen to an emulator, but changing video cards and other various interruptions can fuck shit up badly. It's a function of computers. Consoles don't generally change hardware or install programs or do anything to upset their perfect equilibrium. That's why they sell.)
I am intrigued by the save-states though. That's the thing that pisses me off about consoles. The fascism.
Do the emulators handle 4-player games? Multitaps? Dance pads? Online? USB devices? Light guns (extra challenge: get light guns to work with TV-Out)? Steering wheels. I have all of these devices. I wouldn't want to take any time to figure it out, when I can just put a disc in my PS2.
O.K. I'm done rambling. No real point other than I disagree. For reference, the ONLY consoles I've ever owned: Atari 2600, original Nintendo, PS2. Though last summer I bought a ColecoVision and a C64 at a yardsale. (Incidentally, if you see a commodore monitor, GET IT, it's basically a TV without tuning capabilities, and people will end up selling you a TV for $5. It has sound and everything.) Damn I wi
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I personally think that if Nintendo added some cheap flash memory to their next system to act as a place to save games (but not to replace memory cards, as people will want to carry saves to other places and carry GC saves over for the backwards compatibility) they could possibly get a jump on Sony and/or Microsoft. I don't remember off the top of my head exactly what the size of the GameCube's memory cards are (4 megabits for 59 and 16 megabits for 251? Is that right?), but since my 8MB PS2 card is very empty still after many games and my GC 251 memory card is 3/4 full with about 10 different games worth of data or so, a 16MB flash drive should be plenty for everyone in the next wave and relatively cheap to include.
This isn't true. I've finished the game twice now, and I completed the Earth Shrine first in the first game, and the Wind Shrine first in the second game. Nothing in the Earth Shrine requires you to use the Hookshot, and nothing in the Wind Shrine requires you to use the Mirror Shield. The fact that you didn't see the "guy" (I assume you mean the tree sprite) probably just meant that you already had the Rito with you - Once you've picked up one, you have to go with that one to completion. Can't have them both on the boat, nope nope nope.
Interesting. When I played it I got the Rito girl first. When a friend played it, he wanted to get the tree sprite first, but he simply wasn't there. I'm almost positive that he didn't talk to the Rito girl beforehand, but maybe he did. I haven't bothered to play thru the game again; maybe I will soon.