Slashdot Mirror
XBOX 360=Dreamcast 2.0?
Tenken writes "1UP has an eye opening article on the many similarities between the XBOX 360 and the Dreamcast. It's actually pretty scary, case in point: both consoles launched a year before their major competitors, and even their logos are incredibly similar. The article also goes on to mention why the 360 will not fail miserably like the Dreamcast. "
I love my Dreamcast. I still play it daily (used the HD output for years to my projectors). Never owned a PSx. I still have (younger) friends who knock on my door all the time to get their Dreamcast fix.
I also couldn't give up my Intellivision for a Nintendo for 2 years (Metroid finally did it). Graphics hype wasn't enough. My friends with Nintendo came to my house for all-night Intellivision gaming. Playability was tops. I still have my Intellivision for a few games. Love that controller.
I can't see picking up an X360 for gaming. I own 2 X-Box consoles, 90% for my Media Center Extenders, 10% for my broad's vampire games. Since back in the day, my gaming was PC gaming. Castlevania and Conan, Ultima, Utopia, etc.
Console gaming for me was never about video hype. I love repeated playability with longevity, and catchy music/sounds. Graphics have always been better on my PC, but I turn them to the lowest settings. We're getting really close to "Life" rather than "Life-like" and when we get there, I'll put graphics near the top once I can truly be reality immersed.
There aren't many gamers like me, I think. I'm not a market. I spend a TON on hardware, very little on software. I'd love to find a group/site I can communicate with, consisting of people with similar gaming issues.
Chu Chu Rocket, anyone?
The slashdot editors were probably not assigning the XBOX 360 to have the same value as the Dreamcast, but rather just doing a comparison. But since they have performed the assignment, the XBOX 360 will fail several years ago, in EXACTLY the same way as the Dreamcast. :-)
that Microsoft is not coming off an abysmal failure of a console, it's coming from a console that did relatively well. It seems a lot of people were just so tired of Sega constantly releasing overpriced hardware(eg 32x, Genesis CD, Sega Saturn) with a very limited software selection that they just gave up on Sega and wouldn't even give the Dreamcast a try. Of course Sony's overhyped PS2 announcement didn't help either, but I don't think that was the main cause of the demise of the dreamcast. Microsoft(in the realm of video games anyway) is coming off a somewhat surprising hit with the XBox, a relatively long lived console with lots of games to choose from. They could still fail, but I don't think it will be for the same reasons the Dreamcast failed.
Monstar L
I've already read this article, and I don't feel that many of those "similarities" are even relevant. After all, couldn't much of the same be said of other consoles?
If it failed miserably, how come there's now a version 2.0?
The same thing occurred to me when I saw the white 360 controller in Walmart. "Is the Dreamcast back?" And then I saw the 360 logo. Interesting...
Some of these 'similarities' are just ridiculous. Crazy rich bald guy showing up everywhere?! The slight, mostly irrelavent similarities are far outweighed by the differences, which mostly would have an effect on sales.
Because you'd have to be an 8 year old mathematical genius to figure out TFA.
Maybe it's because I'm old [33] or something but that article made little and/or no sense to me on any level.
Idiots.
#13 on the list is "Peter Moore spearheaded the marketing" and most of the actual similarities seem like Marketing aspects of it so I think a better headline would read "How Peter Moore's marketing style resembles Peter Moore's marketing style"
What's obnoxious and stupid about comparisons and articles like this is that the Dreamcast didn't fail that badly in the US. In fact, the Dreamcast was still very much in the market in the US when it was declared to be killed off. It failed in Japan quite spectacularly, but the US market remained robust.
The Xbox360 can never fail in the sense that dreamcast failed, the worst that can happen is that it fails in the way the original xbox failed. That is to say microsoft will just throw money at it and take big losses without much regard to profit.
As DRM and other crap like lawsuits threaten the mod comunity I just hope they remember that cool mods help sell consoles.Half the fun is finding out what you can do with it BESIDES play games.If they cut that out I'll just build my boys new computers and forget about consoles.At least then I'll know they'll get as much use out of it as our trusty old DC.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Has anyone else noticed that 1up excels at taking up 2 or 3 pages of space in their articles, despite never actually saying anything? They read like one of those papers you write in school when you aren't sure what you want to say, but you started writing anyway because it's due the next morning.
some interesting parallels... but as many as half the things listed are common features or common sense, especially all the "features" you cannot play hd-dvd or blu-ray? well thats not available in the market anyways you can output in hd? what console would skip this? how many consoles no longer play previous gen games? so a racing game company is releasing a similar game to one it had released previously? OMG so it comes with a headset? that's very noteable :rolleyes: ... etc... some of these just really are stupid
It's times like this i wich I had made clever comments so I have had modpoints to give you.
Of course it's true, that's an assignment statement, not a comparison ;). Sheesh.
The Dreamcast is one of my favourite consoles ever. Probably the worst thing that can be said about it is that it sounds like a wood chipper, but apart from that it was a fantastic piece of hardware with a lot of great games. I also still play mine regularly, and if the XBOX 360 is going to be anything like the Dreamcast then I'll probably be picking up one of those as well.
WTF? The stupid article is more fortune-telling than anything else. There's nothing technical or logical about the article. It's basically looking for signs of omens. If Mars is aligned on Venus' right on the launch date, the XBox 360 is bound to succeed....
EvilCON - Made Famous by
They assigned it the value of Dreamcast 2.0. There hasn't been a Dreamcast 2.0 yet, so the XBOX 360 is currently null (Nothing in Visual Basic).
Therefore, it actually doesn't exist. Quod erat demonstratum etc.
(Now, having seen many pictures of the console before this, my head will surely explode in either case.)
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
They saved the real reason it would succeed until the end. Piles and piles of cash. M$ would all but give the console away to make sure that it succeeded and that is the reason it will do well. People will have $10 worth of anything that is free.
Perhaps the rest of the PC industry could counter this rise of the console by designing a standard PC spec for gaming. First create a few simple categories. I suggest "PC Gaming Machine 2005 Level 1, 2 and 3". In each category spec out three of four machines (eg one amd with a nvidia, one intel with nvidia, etc) built with decent components. Level 1 machines have top of the range components, level 2 is where most people will be, level 3 is entry gaming. The games publishers could just test their game against these machines specs and get a tick in the "PC Gaming Machine 2005 Level 2 Compatible" (or whatever) box.
Simple, understandable and doesn't need to cost the Earth.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
"Faced a "far superior" next-generation PlayStation console that wowed gamers with fancy tech demos."
my ass, dreamcast blows away all playstations, including PS3, it had amazing gfx, playstation always sucks
Best. Console. Ever.
If the xbox 360 can have half the amount of original games that the Dreamcast had, I'm getting one.
And yes, even though I hate Microsoft, Sony has become the new Evil. DRM on *everything* seems to be their goal, and the PS3 will be the ultimate foot-in-the door in their quest to lock down all things digital.
Blu-Ray. Just say no!
-Copyright law #69:Whenever Mickey Mouse is about to enter the public domain,copyrights get extended by 25 years.
Listing fluffy similarities between two systems isn't "pretty scary". It's pretty easy to do when you set your standards for a similarity at such a meaninglessly low level.
OMG!! Both were white systems when the previous generations were black. Noooz!!!
Calling the PS3 "far superior at this point is rediculous. Mentioning "hi-def" when the Dreamcast was released before there was basically any hi-def sets in homes and when the PS3 is also supporting hi-def is moronic.
The article itself was so fluffy I can't believe it made it to the front page. But hey, if you didn't RTFA in this case it only takes aobut 20 seconds and there's lots of little pictures to help you out.
Prove that an article can make little and no sense to you.
Pedantry aside, I fully understood the comparative list of pictures the article had: Peter Moore, the similar logos, the similar OSes, etc.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Hmm, I read it, but then put it down in disgust on reason number 7:
D: Had tons of amazing games...but no Halo 3.
X: Will have Halo 3. And it will be huge.
That point being given to the XBox? To put it bluntly, this is biased crap.
In VisualBASIC.NET, you do comparisons with a single =. Maybe Slashdot editors are just Microsoft whores?
Indeed, the people that accuse Dreamcast of being a "failed" system invariably are those that never had a dreamcast! The system rocked, and had eminently fun & groundbreaking games. If, like me, this is what you want from your console, then the Dreamcast was a smashing success (actually its my favorite console of all time). If, on the other hand what you desire from your console is "the same mediocrity that all your friends have", then the PS2 is your man.
For those who read TFA... did you notice that the Time Magazine shown in #10 has Bill Gates behind the 360 resembling the all-famous Borg image? *shudder*
In any case, I'd rather have bill gates selling a famous videogame console rather than forcing a crappy operating system down our throats.
Man, this is Microsoft, we're talking BASIC!
/ You seem to try to create a gaming \
\ console. May I help you? /
\ ____
\ / __ \
\ O| |O|
|| | |
|| | |
|| |
|___/
If MS's DRM is going to get lots of support, make sure other vendors' products will too, otherwise they will just standardize on MS's DRM and everyone will be forced to go through them. However with their past marketing experience on proprietary technologies (memory stick, minidisc, atrac-3, etc) it doesn't seem like Sony's DRM will become ubiquitous. Granted it will be in their most popular product (PS3), but outside of the actual console and movies, where would the DRM be used? It's not like the same DRM technology will be used to encode documents and e-books and stuff that doesn't have to do with the PS3 or movies, so how would Sony's DRM gain the support needed to have it invade your life the way DRM applied to Microsoft products would?
If it's being used on the most popular games and movies on the PS3 and Blu-Ray... games and movies have a HUGE history of being warezed ASAP, so Sony's DRM will most likely be circumvented and not have much impact.
Twinstiq, game news
Illuminati! I'll have to put on my tin-foil hat.
So, if one of the biggest problems faced by the original Dreamcast was that is was ahead of its time for some of its features like online play, then I'd say the timing for the 360 is just about perfect!
I saw the 360 yesterday at Best Buy. Honestly, I wasn't all that impressed. It looks like they gave it a video card upgrade and put it in a new shell. It had a FPS war game demo on it (can't remember the name, maybe Medal of Honor 2? The game is out on the current gen's consoles). Naturally, there were a bunch of people around it because it's The Next Big Thing(R) supposedly. Same controller, new video card. I can get the same experience by putting a new video card in my computer, at equal or lesser price.
I was displeased with the sega saturn, i think that was a turn off for alot of people for the dreamcast. I really enjoyed the dreamcast, i spent countless days playing tony hawk pro skater, sonic, GTA 2, powerstone, Marvel vs capcom etc, when they said they were no longer going to support it, it was very disappointing, the graphics were good, i enjoyed the controler (compared to the N64 which i hated) I think giving up the gamesystem was a mistake for the dreamcast, they finally got one that people actually liked, i guess they couldn't compete with Sony's mega millions
Never used Ada have you? = Equality Testing := Assignment
I don't know everything.
Just remember, Linux/FOSS lovers, every purchase you make supports someone else's philosophies. The road to 360 leads to 666.
Mountain Dew is in no way similar to Pepsi. Drawing a parallel between the two is absolutely ridiculous. Mountain Dew is gathered by hand only from the freshest clover leaves in the unspoiled Smokey Mountains of Tennessee. It was the official drink of the original olympic games. It is versatile. It can substitute for blood plasma during emergencies or natural disasters. Pepsi, however, is nothing but sugar water with brown food coloring.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
Prove that an article can make little and no sense to you.
No.
TFA seems to really be picking on the Dreamcast, but I always loved it. Its controller is still my favorite. To this day I use it to play some amazing games via the VGA box, such as Sonic Adventure (the last really great Sonic game), Seaman, or Jet Set Radio.
Don't tell me you missed the '?'. Where's the following "expr:expr"?
Yeah, but.. were Dreamcast games developed on a Mac?
Xbox 360 games are...
-Myke
It's a shame SEGA is no longer in the console market. I owned a Game Gear, Mega Drive and a Sega Saturn (I chose the Sega Saturn over the PS1.) and I would certainly still chose a SEGA console over the competition these days if there were one. I think it's mainly because as a SEGA fan I was a natural anti-Nintendo and now all I see is Nintendo (PS, xbox, etc = nintendo for me, got it?).
/. so please be kind or just ignore it)
Ok, maybe I'm just being way too radical but, seriously, how can anyone chose Mario over Sonic? Sonic rocks\m/
I bet Apple will buy SEGA someday and launch a console that will kick the competition's asses. Apple + SEGA, that would be sweet.
tottaly off topic, I know..
(my first post on
Or more factually, Complaint Management.
A couple things that helped kill the Dreamcast that I haven't seen listed yet.
1. Incompatibility issues within different versions of the Dreamcast with older and newer Dreamcast games. The motherboard got changed during the Dreamcast run which made it so some of the older games weren't working on some of the newer Dreamcasts, along with some of the older Dreamcasts not working with some of the newer games since the newer games were speced to the newer system. Standard line we gave people calling in complaining that their games didn't work was to go back to the store and exhange the game for a new one, we should have been telling them to go back to the store and exchange their dreamcast for a new one.
2. After market controllers would blow out the controller ports.
3. Very easy to copy games.
I doubt that the 360 will have problems 1 or 3, but would be interesting if it ends up with #2.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Marketing ?
and deeper pockets.
---
There's also a big difference between DreamCast and Microsoft's consoles :
- DreamCast : runs home brewed software out-of-the-box (although on CD-R and not on GD-ROM).
Some free developpement kits where available for it (KallistiOS)
Some were even blessed by Sega (some *BSD)
- Xbox 1 : DRM filled shit. You must put Mod-Chip inside or exploit bugs to be able to do whatever you want to do with a piece of hardware you paid for.
Microsoft has even tried to stop this, either suing Lik-Sang for providing mod-chips, or trying to lock user with software exploits out of XBox Live.
Developpement has only been possible on the XBox because it is basically a repackaged PC architecture and because the Windows based software is filled with bugs. Developpers have asked to be provided keys to sign software for unmodded X-Boxes but no answers from Microsoft
- Xbox 360 will surely have even more DRM barriers against homebrewer. And isn't PC architecture anymore
---
BTW: DreamCast is not *powered* on Windows CE, but *compatible* with Windows CE. (according to the sticker).
In fact, most of the commercial games are designed using Katana (Sega's own proprietary system),
and most homebrewed software us KallistiOS.
XBOX runs a modified Windows 2k and Microsoft is putting a great deal of efforts to be sure that nothing else runs on it.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
This time around, it feels like the market is a little smarter and not as willing to believe the bullshit. I may be completely wrong about this but that's how it seems. MS will roll out early with a brute force style product, I expect Sony and Nintendo to roll out with products that take much less loss on their initial sales. If there continues to be any parity in the market, and there has been, then they will all be fairly similar in terms of technical specs and it'll come down to the few key titles moving things and then whoever comes up with the next big thing.
The other thing, Sony may have a slight hardware disadavantage in the current market between PS2 and Xbox (tech specs doesn't matter that much though... they are all still pretty close, all things being equal) but they were ambitious, when I bought the PS2, I knew I was going to get a DVD player if nothing else and at that time DVD players were like $150 so I throw in some extra money and I can play games too and I can play ps1 games that block buster sold for $5 a pop. PS3 is doing that with HD and Blu-Ray DVD, ps2 compatibility for my 30-40 games. What's xbox360 doing that with? I don't even know that it will play all of my xbox games, it looks pretty clear that it won't be a DVD player. They're going early but they aren't raising the level, it's just an upgrade and I also think that the technical architecture is going to make it difficult to be manufactured at a break even cost; the big piece where the cost is is a triple core expensive CPU and I think Sony's loss poing will be an early to market bluray and those things historically drop in cost a ton and I just expect a consumer company like Sony to put a lot more thought in to the cost of the CPU so I expect it to be easier to cost reduce than the xbox's will be.
I'm just speculating here but PS3 will either have to be dramatically better looking than the competition or it will be costing the same when it ships so if they can break even faster than MS can, can't they just start rolling with the greatest hits and platinum hits and catch up pretty quickly with cost reduced games since the hardware will pay for itself? That means MS will have to make some really really good games to captialize on this lead, doesn't it?
About the Dreamcast controller. And yes I had two of them, just like I have two current XBOX controllers. The dreamcast was unergonomical and uncomfortable for long gaming sessions for people that have big hands. I use the s-type XBOX controller now for playing HALO and HALO2 all night long, and the 360 controller looks like it is going to be at least as comfortable as the current XBOX controller.
There may be quite a few similarities betweeen xbox360 and dreamcast however the same would apply to any 2 products if you look hard enough. The bottom line is that while Dreamcast tried to be an inovator there is absolutelly not a single inovative bone in xbox360.
.... samo pretty much applies to the rest of the hardware as well (oh and I really hope that MS paid Logitech for the "borrowed" design of the controller )
... )and the appearance of the console is pretty unique too. Heck even the logo has it's personality. As far as xbox360 goes, frankly, I don't know what to think of a stupid design like that. It looks like someone accidentally came up with it and it actually doesn't look like any logo at all ( this is not a good thing and I am not talking about the X logo on the controller ).
1. The CPU idea was largelly borrowed from IBM/the cell team.
2. GPU is nothing ground breaking
3. XBOX Live only build on top of the existing online playing experiences which are borrowed from pc online games.
4. DVD-9 is just plain old and I really think that MS should have pushed for HD-DVD. After all someone said that MS will do everything possible to make xbox360 a success.
On the other had Dreamcast while a failior did try to break new ground. The modem is a really stupid idea when you think about it today but it was quite a thing back then. The media while not that great is unique to Sega and they did move away from the cartriges that every thing else was using at the time. The controller is very much like nothing else ( good or bad
So the bottom line is that I really don't see how exactly xbox360 is viewed as dreamcast 2.0. As far as the destiny of xbox360 goes and I am not so sure that it would be so much more successful than the original. After all the only part of the market that MS really has a chance of capturing are the owners of Nintendo. Come to think about it, I don't think that more of ~40% of the Nintendo owners are going to go for an xbox360. There are good 20% that will wait for Revolution ( it's called company loyalty and MS should really learn that ) and the other 40% are much more likelly to get a ps3 because of the game titles and the fact that the game orientation is much closer to that of nintendo than MS. The biggest problem that I have with xbox360 and MS is that treat the console market just like they treat the PC one and those are 2 very different ball fields. All that said I do own an XBOX ( with XBMC and all that jazz ) and I'm proud of it. However, this time arround I am thinking of getting a ps3 ( after all it's all about the games and NOT the hardware when you are talking about a console ).
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
"DC: Had tons of amazing games...but no Halo 3
X360: Will have Halo 3. And it will be huge."
How the hell do they know Halo 3 will be huge? If it's like the last one it won't be finished and it won't be a patch on the FPS games the PC has been doing for years.
Who the fuck is bribing the whole games industry into giving the Halo franchise such a cock sucking? It's average at best and nothing revolutionary, why everyone hails these games as the second coming I don't know. And before anyone tells me about Halo 2 on Live, it's full of squealing 13 year olds who call everyone gay when they get fragged.
I remember those great gaming bashes with chu chu rocket, le mans, mars matrix and tennis 2k2, god i remember those days. We still have a great collection of DC games.
On the subject, Nostradamus predicted the launch date of the 360 and if you ad up 551 you get 911 OMFG !
RUPERT! I TOLD YOU TO WATCH THE BAGS! You were looking at the boys again, WEREN'T YOU.
Believe it or not, the gaming business isn't about giving you and your friends fun games to play, it's about making money. That's why it's hard to qualify the XBox as a success. The XBox lost more money than any other console in history. Microsoft has lost billions of dollars on the XBox. Heck, it's still losing money on a quarterly basis as Microsoft readies the 360. If the XBox 360 is as big a financial disaster as the XBox then Microsoft investors are almost certainly going to wonder what they are doing throwing their money down a hole.
Now, I have to slightly disagree with you there. Firstly, was it actually a "disaster"? Is Microsoft in financial troubles because of it? I couldn't claim to have anything near to exact figures, but I'm nonetheless quite sure that the answer is no, it is not in bad financial shape now because of the X-Box. Just because it didn't make money doesn't make Microsoft instantly broke, and investors know that . . .
Now, I'm usually the first to lambast the system for the encouragement of short-term quarterly gains instead of long-term goals, but I think in this case Microsoft (or, since this is slashdot after all, I should say "M$") has been pretty clear with its goals and the investors are on board with it. The fact that Microsoft is making so much money in every other area is exactly why it needs to go into this area even if it means losing a fraction (perhaps a sizable fraction, even) of that profit; there really isn't much room for growth where it is now. Already with a virtual monopoly, what is "M$" left to do? So what if some money is lost in the short term. It's a sacrifice to get a foothold in an industry that is quite difficult to break through into. But the X-Box is a success because it does show a widespread adoption. It was certainly never intended to make money, it was meant to be successful in the "screw the monetary consideration!.....for now" way. And a foothold in the video-game industry gives the Redmondians a stepping stone for access into the vague but promising directions that digital entertainment is always threatening to soar off into.
The company has grown, and growth is nearly synonymous with success. The profit part can come later. If Microsoft had less of a seriously impressive disposable income, then it would be another story, but the company has the luxury of such (relatively) grand planning.
Naturally, if anyone has facts to back up my arguement (or alternatively, to dismantle it) please do elaborate!
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Because we're talking about Microsoft here? Remember Windows 1.0?
The Xbox isn't yet supposed to make money. It's supposed to extend Microsoft's market. Then, it's supposed to make money.
The XBox[360] has tons of marketing, tons of cash to burn, tons of polygons... er, that's about it.
I think I might buy one at launch and resell it for equal price, just so MS loses money.
My apologies, I do realize that post of mine was quite insulting.
Unfortunately, articles that cater to math geniuses, software experts and pedants like me are /.'s niche. People who are not immersed in technology every day are thus given a de facto kick to the curb.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
The console makers don't always lose money on the hardware. Typically, they lose money on the first few batches, and then as manufacturing gets cheaper they eventually break even and then even start to make money. The original XBOX was not able to really capitalize on this because MSFT did not own a lot of the intellectual property in the hardware. That's one of the big differences with the 360: they own the IP for the triple-core PPC processor (even though IBM's fabbing it for them), which means improvements in semiconductor manufacturing (Moore's Law) --> reduced hardware costs --> profit on the hardware in addition to licensing fees on software.
The amount of money that MSFT makes on xbox games is also not nearly as much as you might think. The $50 you pay gets divided many ways from the brick-and-mortar stores all the way back through the supply chain to the developer and back to MSFT themselves. If they got $5 per game (which is probably too high), their 11 million units of Halos 1 and 2 would only pocket them $55M (the 11M units figure is about a year old now, and also includes the PC version).
...or I'll bust yer lip! ;D
Seriously. I never really cared for Segas consoles until that thing came out. It just hit all the right buttons for me. So to speak.
BytesTemplar.com
Xbox 360 will be a success. As long as Halo 3 is offered only on 360, buying a new Xbox 360 will be something that people simply have to do.
This is the nerdiest place on the planet :P
RUPERT! I TOLD YOU TO WATCH THE BAGS! You were looking at the boys again, WEREN'T YOU.
the xbox was a failure. billions have gone to waste on that and the 360...the only reason xbox wasn't a complete failure is because they have un-limited funds. Any other company would have died, like Sega for example.
I am getting more and more confused.... not about the technical facts, but about support for online play....
..... nor want I to wait for a ps3 to figure it out, that there are only company servers with horrid ping times and limited amount of players .....
... i dream on ..
... I just wan't into console gaming, I lived alone and a pc in the living room, bedroom, wherever else for gaming and work was OK then ... now I am married and a console fits the living room better.... I am sad I missed that era, but it was just a cultural difference ..
I had a Ps2, and then an xbox, and now I barely boot the ps2: load times just kill the experience, and graphics are not there (for 1st person games, that I like the most)....
Ps2 net support is limited to the manufacturers' often paying service (often only available to the US), while many xbox games have link mode, that you can play on XBC or KAI.
I just do not see my self as a Live subscriber, not because I am not willing to pay a few bucks, but because it is simply not sold where I live, and the Live site is super confusing about how the subscriptions work (seems that you can buy subs in stores, well not here.)
Also you can play link games on many of nodes worldwide, and you can always pick one witn an acceptable ping, if I sub to LIVE and mi ping is bad to their servers; I am screwed.
Now back to the question : who will have a decent amount of LIVE games that is not limited to certain countries?
I am not a game junkie, but I like to play a few hours with people a few hours a week at nights and I do not want to get into the pitfall of getting an xbox 360, than drool over the ps3 with better games
It is really bad to say, but sometimes I wish developers mad cross compatible games (on the network level at least)...
I know bigger machines get bigger maps and different features, but there should abe a way to have the same maps with less bling-bling for less powerful machines, and more for the stronger...
I mean, you sent the position and actions to the server, you can implement a uniform audio encoding for comms, could it be done? So I do not need a machine for Socom3 and an other for Halo (i hate halo), then an other for who knows what?
It would be nice to play the same game on ps2,xbox, ps3, 360 and pc, over nicely tunneled "link mode".
yeah
Dreamcast: never had one, but I have friends who still love it
it's just that their marketing sucked, lots. They had the best looking games in existence. Games that look so good there was no comparison. Games that looked so good that only 5th gen ps2 games (and very few of those) compare. So why the fsck didn't they show them off? Instead, we got dumb ass 'It's thinking' commercials with Sonic all 'jammin' to the xtreme!!!' with the NBA. wtf?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
They couldn't care less that you are running Linux on it, or playing homebrew games that make them no money
I want to start a company to develop and sell homebrew games on the consoles, but none of the console makers will talk to me.
What makes you think the Dreamcast failed because of marketing?
I knew about it. I bought consoles. Heck, I bought an Atari Jaguar - AND the CD unit! It wasn't like I made my choices based on popularity.
But I just wasn't interested in the Dreamcast, because while it had some good games it did not have (in my mind) a lot. And the other problem was that for a brand new system, it seemed underpowered. To a lot of gamers that was a point in time where the increase in graphics meant more than they do now. To me the Dreamcast languished because of being slightly underpowered and a trickle of games I cared about.
In that respect I do think the 360 has some things in common. Not exactly in the graphics where it appears to be about equal, but more in storage with the space-limiting DVD meaning games with wider ranges of graphic content will be released on the PS3. And there just aren't enough interesting games lined up for release yet (the ones that are actually releasing anyway) to make me want to buy the system now, or seemingly even in six months.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Complaint #4 is dumb. A lot of people were still using dial up and as such the online games were designed to work well over dial up (and they did!) Some Dreamcasts actually shipped with a 33.6Kbps modem instead.
Complaint #7 is dumb. The games on the Dreamcast were really good, and a lot of them were very original. I didn't find the games available for the XBOX to be very impressive. And then they go on to compare ONE GAME (which is a SEQUEL I might add) to the entire Dreamcast library? That is not only wrong, but incredibly stupid.
And just for the record, the controller might not have looked very futuristic, but it fits my hands very nicely.
One interesting aspect of the 360 that may help it fare well is with a DVD drive instead of a newer drive like HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, piracy will be simpler - so more peeople may actually buy the console for that reason. Even pirates end up buying some games so it might help it out.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I still rank the "failed" dreamcast as my #1 game console I've owned. The design was compact, the graphics were good, the logo was cool and I had tons of Sonic! (plus my psycho tamagotchi fix from the VMU's).
-Xen
/ You appear to laugh at unfunny jokes. \
\ Surrender the broodwich, motherfucker!/
\
\
| ||||||
^+^ || || ||
\--||||||||||-\
||||__||||
_{] [}_
/ You'r broodwich would taste good \ /
/|6|6|\
/+\ /+\
s prints/7962/">Fruitfucker!</a
\ with some vi0lated tomatoes in it.
\
\
O
|
|
-----
| |
-| |-
( |_( )_| )
" \__U__/ "
| |
| |
<a href="http://www.thinkgeek.com/pennyarcade/poster
The 32x was not released in Japan. It was never really supposed to be released anywhere.
Isn't it great?
One of the things Microsoft is doing that is cool is that have an idie developer program. There are a lot of shareware PC titles that are going to be orderable and downloadable via xbox live. It isn't as nice as having a fully DRM-free machine, but orders of magnitude better than the Sony machine.
Xbox 360 would be Dreamcast 3.0.
Back when Dreamcast was starting up, MS offered up their Windows CE as a platform to Sega as the DC OS. It came in late, so the first games didn't use it. But Sega was pressing their developers to use it, and MS was helping out a lot. Japanese DCs came with the text "designed for Windows CE" on the front.
But something happened, Sega got word MS was doing all this because they were working on a gaming machine of their own, a "super Dreamcast". And MS was offering up CE so that when MS' box came out they would have a lineup of games ready to go, or at least easy to port. It would give them a huge legup on all the other competitors in the video game market (including Sega).
So Sega immediately told their developers not to use Windows CE. Only one game came out with Windows CE, Sega Rally (the browser also used CE). And US Dreamcasts say "compatible with Windows CE" on the front.
And not too long after, MS released their machine with a controller which was very similar to the DC controller. Same basic layout, with two additional buttons and the hole in the top for the memory unit display covered (Sega had moved away from the memory cards with displays by that time too).
So, Xbox really was a super Dreamcast, or a Dreamcast 2.0 if you wish.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Sure sign that someone's crazy: they liked the Intellivision controller. I mean, I spent a fair amount of my youth on that system, had a couple of the "talking" games, but that evil controller sucked. Those side buttons that every game used so frequently were murder on my thumbs. That, and if you lost the stupid plastic insert for the controllers some games became almost unplayable. Finally moving to the Nintendo controller was wonderful. It almost makes my thumbs ache all over again to think about the Intellivision.
People aren't affraid, anymore, to own one of each. Sure, there are penny pinchers, but in general most of the gamer market will get teh 360 now and ps3 later. Who does't have both? (I have dreamcast & xbox).
Microsoft literally gave the Xbox away.
:)
Microsoft did not literally give the Xbox away. When we say stuff like "Microsoft gave the Xbox away", we accept some slight exaggeration being used to make a point.
I can't see any justification for throwing "literally" in there, unless you actually meant "literally". Or perhaps you didn't mean "literally" literally. But I doubt it...
Please don't tell me you were actually referring to Microsoft giving a few of the things away in promotions; we know that's not what you meant
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
As I recall, I lost interest in the Dreamcast when I realized that Sega had pulled off the same stunt several times where they made a gaming system and games to go with it, but any ability to play games from a prior system was a poorly executed afterthought. Even when the add-on CD player became available, it just seemed like Sega was taking advantage of its core customer base by creating yet another system to which they have to buy essentially the same games over and over again.
I eventually bought the Gamecube thinking I had selected a system that was capable of providing years of entertainment value, only to realize after the fact that Nintendo was doing the same thing I had accused Sega of doing for years. After playing a few 'Gamecube Only' titles and pushing for a personal best high score on my favorite games, I boxed up my GC and haven't played it since.
This time around I think I'll skip the whole console fever and save up for a solid laptop.
You say the lack of HD is moronic, but then skip over the item that says they are similar because Verne Troyer and J Allard are both bald?
Also, for what it matters, the article is careful to say "apparently far superior" in reference to the PS3 (and PS2). Personally, I think the PS3 is super to the Xbox 360 also, but as you correctly point out, time will tell better than predictions do. (Before you call me a hater, I have had a 360 on order for months already.) No video game mag/site is going to openly attack one console or another,no matter what they might think. It's just not good for business. It offends potential advertisers and some sensitive readers.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Dreamcast had most of the best games, even though it was never a great commercial success. So if the XBox360 is going to be like the Dreamcast, I want one. It might not be a great thing for Microsoft, but they can afford it.
Hi, Bill!
"Sufferin' succotash."
The Dreamcast was a financial failure and caused Sega to get out of the hardware business. Sorry.
Were some of the games very good? Oh hell yes. I played the shit out of Phantasy Star Online 1/2 (before cheaters ruined it), Soul Calibur, Skies of Arcadia, and Jet Set Radio. Uh, that was about it though.
Being mad at Sony for having better sales and in the end a much better game selection just proves you're a fanboy. That "mediocrity" comment will provide me with a chuckle or two when I'm playing Shadow of the Collosus, Devil May Cry 3, Ico (for the 10th time), Metal Gear Solid 3, Fatal Frame 1/2, Silent Hill 2/3/4, God of War, Ace Combat 4/5, etc. etc.
They are basically only the second company every to succede at that, Sony being the first. After the NES got popular and gaming was revitalized, it was basically a Nintendo-Sega hegemony. Sure there were other consoles, lots of them, but they were all tiny. The PC Engine (TG16), Neo Geo, 3DO, Jaguar, all did just peanuts for business. There was Nintendo on top, Sega with a slowly but surely slipping second place and then maybe someone is a waaaaay distant third.
Sony was the first company to ever smash in to that and survive. Now they did it at an extremely good time too. Sega's downward slide was in full force with the disaster that was the Saturn. Nintendo pissed off some developers with the announcement that the N64 was cart based (Square essentially told Nintendo FF7 WOULD be on a CD, on the N64 or not) and also miscalculated the kid gamer market, forgetting that many of the kids who had NES's were now older teens or young adults. In to that gap, Sony stepped successfully, the first major player other than Nintendo and Sega since, well, Atari.
Microsoft didn't have nearly so easy an environment to try and compete in. Sony's second gen system was out and people liked it, between Nintendo and Sony there was a selection of games for everyone. For all that, they managed to do it and well enough to edge out Nintendo in market share, and they are now comming back for round 2.
I certianly don't think Microsoft has a lock on the gaming market and the 360 may well prove to be less than they hoped, but to try and write it off because the X-box was costly is silly. Of COURSE it was costly, they were trying to bash in to a market that's extremely hard to get in to. They were also smart enough to know you either go all in or you forget it. To try and just poke at the edges, even if your stuff is superior, and sell an expensive console is doomed to failure.
This is even more true these days in the era of the computer GPU. Time was, consoles were it for high-end graphics. You could spend all the money you liked on a computer, the top dog console would still whack it. No longer the case. At best, a first flight console is as good as new accelerators (the 360 should be roughly on par with upper ATi X1000 and nVidia 7000 series accelerators) and it doesn't take long for comptuers to pull ahead. So those with tons of free cash and the need for the best will go with computer gaming, and not spend tons of money on your specality console.
I own one and while I don't think it is too kiddie, they DID lend that impression with the GC earlier on because there really wasn't a lot of adult/mature appealing titles out for it when it shipped, unlike the PS2 and X-Box.
What was available in the "M" category at the first release date?
Eternal Darkness, I think was mostly it (And a damned good game at that...). Most of the rest of the titles were kiddie style games and a couple of things like Madden Football, etc. There were follow on titles of the "cool" variety like Eternal Darkness, but the damage of the impression was done by how many kiddie type titles were available for the GC versus the more adult ones.
Nintendo missed the boat on this round of consoles; the titles they'd lined up at release colored the impressions of the console and made it a little less appealing to other studios to make titles for- the impression was that Nintendo was placing the market for the GC with the younger audiences. Basically, Nintendo was still marketing to and planning for the younger crowd where they used to make their money, when they should have been catering initially to a broader audience with the rollout of the GC. When the X-Box came out, they had an edge, but they lost it fairly quickly because MS could out-spend them and managed to score enough X-Box Only titles (such as Shenmue, etc...) that they lost that edge. Right now, I wouldn't count them out yet- they've still got at least one iteration of consoles to go before they're in trouble and I think they might have learned something from the oopses done with the GC's marketing and sales efforts (which they DID do...).
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Late is relative.
It became available between the time of the design of the product and the time of the original launch. But there were several games already under development before launch of course, they didn't have a chance to use CE, as it wasn't ready yet. Then a few things came out with CE (browser, Sega Rally, as you say, perhaps one or two others), and then CE disappeared again.
This is because all of this happened early in the product cycle, you seemed to have missed that in my post. This whole episode was over and done with before DC launched in the US (as evidenced by the labelling on the US DCs vis-a-vis CE). And yes, at that point, Sega developer relations was telling developers not to use CE, as I said. They didn't want their devlopers making games that would be used against them to launch MS' console. This was all close to "from the start", as you make it out to be.
It does not surprise someone could port a dating simulator to CE in the relatively short period in which CE was available before the Japanese launch. Dating simulators don't take a lot of work to bring up.
As to your #3, you're mistaken there. All of this happened very early on in the product lifecycle, even before it launched in the US.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
I personally don't know why. I got Halo for the PC and I'm not at all impressed. I mean ya it's cool and all, but it fails to impress me next to Doom 3 and UT2004.
But maybe that's not the point. Maybe we need to look at what it was competing against: Other console FPS games. After all there are a lot of console gamers that don't cross over, they own consoles for gaming and a simple PC for Internet. They've never played a good PC FPS game. So while the things that Halo broght to the table were things we'd already seen in PC games, often years before (like Internet CTF games), it was all new to the console people. I remember how cool QuakeWorld on the PC was, and in a number of ways, this was like that for the consoles.
Then there's the fan advertising. If you don't know about it, have a look at Red vs Blue sometime (www.redvsblue.com). It's a cartoon made using Halo and Halo 2, Machinima I think the animation style is called. It's really funny, and very popular. A side effect is it's a massive, free, Halo ad for MS. I admit, it was what got me to buy Halo PC. I started watching it, and wanted an idea of what the game was like.
So, regardless of it's merits against things like the Unreal Engine, I fully expect Halo 3 to be a massive success. The console gamers love Halo, and there are a lot of them.
I don't mean important to you, I mean important to the success of the console. Looking back at console history I see all of.... Zero consoles that succeded because of home brew games. In fact all of the most successful ones went to some length to lock out non-licensed games, starting all the way back with the NES.
Regardless of how much you like it, the Dreamcast was a failure. It was the nail in the coffin for Sega in the hardware business, they don't even do their own arcade hardware anymore. Regardless of how much you dislike it, the X-box was a success. It took Microsoft from nothing to ahead of Nintendo in the console industry, no minor feat.
If hackability and modability is important to you, do what I do: Game on the PC. Use the hardware you want, hack the games with the tools you want, experience user developed content on a level consoles only dream of. Get a copy of UT2004 and try some of the thousands of mods out there, some that are professional quality (EPIC has links to some of the very best on their site), play with the awesome dev tools that come with the game, etc.
The home-brewed aspect of a console is IRRELIVANT to it's market success. Almost all console gamers simply don't care. Their reason to be a console gamer is it's cheap and simple. Buy the hardware, and then any game just works. For those of us that like to tinker, there's the rich world that is PC gaming.
To me the biggest difference is that Microsoft has enough money to support the 360 with decent marketing and has enough sway to get the big devs and publishers on board. Sega didn't.
10 reasons why the Xbox 360 will succeed where the Dreamcast failed. Really this is just a light hearted look at what MS might and might not be doing right.
Still, in my opionion, the reason the DC failed was the the PS2 had apparently better specs and DVD playback. Blu-ray support is not such a big draw as DVD was then, and the specs don't look anywhere near as much better on the PS3 than Xbox360.
You're right about my post re: HD. I shortened my thoughts too much. I did mean to say what you said, that it was the comparison that was stupid, not that DC not having HD was stupid. Sorry about that. Also, it was supposed to be somewhat humorous and point out how you were perhaps taking the article too seriously, that is shows its ridiculousness many times over.
I can't agree with what you say about PS3 and Xbox 360. On paper, the PS3 is far faster. It is "apparently far superior". The PS3 CPU was designed to be the GPU, and it would have done okay. But when J Allard started spouting about how bad-ass the 360 just before E3, Sony went to NVidia and got a highly capable GPU also. So the PS3 is definitely way overpowered.
Now, will the games be better because of it? No, not necessarily, because it may be too difficult to program for. But the 360 is no picnic either, so it's going to be a real horse race to see what happens. Additionally, both are so powerful that many developers don't every try very hard to work them out. Additionally, the cost of making the collateral (textures, etc.) for an HDTV system is so high that all non-first party titles will have to run on both platforms. And that means the games will only be as good as the lesser of the two is capable of doing anyway. So, I expect the playing field to be pretty level.
I agree MS will work very hard on the online service. It's key to their platform. To be honest, "free Live" is mainly a vehicle for delivering bug fixes to their games (the launch titles will certainly be quite buggy, given the short development times) and collecting micropayments (track packs). Did you see the presentations at E3? MS was showing how basically you can set up "shops" selling clothing for characters on their services. And certainly they'll take a cut. The eBay model.
Honestly, my biggest beef with Xbox 360 is J Allard's big promises at E3 versus the reality.
J Allard: wireless controllers included!
reality: optional at extra cost
J Allard: hard drive too!
reality: optional at extra cost
J Allard: free Live!
reality: you can't do anything on Live silver that Live was traditionally defined to mean, except for download game patches and pay for track packs. Actually, useful Live prices went up 50%.
J Allard (or somebody): It'll probably, maybe, have HD-DVD.
reality: nope (that one was perhaps a little sketchy to start with because HD-DVD wasn't going to be cost effective or even available before the end of 2005)
I don't mind that it doesn't have HD-DVD actually, it's just isn't possible in the timeframe. I do mind that they still want to charge me for an online experience I get for free with PC games (and get a cut-down version of for free with PS2). I don't mind (much) that it doesn't have digital video output (thus precluding HD-DVD playback). I do very much mind that J Allard made many many empty promises, seemingly to get the hype machine rolling at the only E3 that 360 would be at (even in prototype form) without the presence of the PS3. Please MS (Allard specifically), respect your customers more than that.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Dreamcast 1.0 = Sega Dreamcast Dreamcast 2.0 = XBOX Dreamcast 3.0 = XBOX 360
http://www.andrewkendall.com/
They changed the article so it doesn't mention Halo. Now it's marketing quotes with no analysis. Much better... or something. Seems like a website run by lazy people with nothing to say. I hope it doesn't get any attention from slashdot any more.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
Microsoft: "How many 0's would you like on the end of that?"
sig fault
He might be able to explain everything to you.
1. Nintendo is the most profitable of the big three, despite having the smallest share.
2. One of the reasons that the Gamecube is so dang affordable ($90 retail here in Canada) is because they left out the ability to play DVDs. Those licenses cost money.
3. The "kiddie" market is extremely lucrative, and Nintendo dominates it. Kids harass their parents constantly about toys. Parents have money. Teenagers and college students don't. Did you ever wonder why 90% of your friends' XBoxes and PS2s are modded?
4. If "Clueless Dad" walks into Wal-Mart looking for a console for his kids, he'll find that the cheapest one has about 200 E-rated games. On top of that, "Clueful Dad" will probably know that this cheap console is so durable that his kids will have to work really, really hard to wreck it before the next generation comes out.
5. Were the 'cutesy discs' really a problem? I can only think of a handful of games that needed to span two discs.
I think that Nintendo is working to convert a bit of its "kiddie" image to a "casual" image. The fact of the matter is, Gates didn't get into the console business because of Sony. He did it because he heard Nintendo had these insane 20% profit margins. Now he cries himself to sleep every night because Nintendo still has 20% profit margins and he's losing a mint.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
I was late to choose Dreamcast - at the moment, I knew it s going out. Still, I can only say being happy to have couple of these (for feeling on safe side, mainly). Gaming experience is incredible from the Sonic moment one. And it did NOT had Microsoft "fame" to hurt sincere pleasure. I am proud at this point to say, that games in general (not only computer-based) are my fun hobby (as is punk-rock with deviations like pixies), even if being adult and also IT guy practicing since RSX-11. There is SYSTEM in every game, IDEA, set of rules, phenomena. So far, Dreamcast was the only console, I could see, where computer games and gaming overall excels on. Do not, and will not, believe in X-Box. Ever. It will be just what Windows and DOS is, never what Apple or Dreamcast is. There is difference. Even if MS is participating in progress amongst other wrong things, they do.
And Choo Choo - very competent gaming choice to include with (I believe) every Dreamcast console. As we have 4 controllers, and enough for that children on our street, it occasionally becomes pure and pleasant gaming excellence. Love, Dreamcast!
(First party titles x (licensing fees x installed base)) - (hardware loss + advertising loss)
This formula is the one that explains why the first Xbox lost Microsoft all of that money.
Open Source Sushi
"big hands"
Bullshit. I have (rather) big hands and the Controller S feels very uncomfortable in my hands. The dreamcast controller has always felt great, for hours on end. As has the N64 controller. The playstation style of controller has always felt disgusting. I liked the original XBox ginormipad. Big hands has nothing to do with it.
For the most of the life of the two consoles (GC and Xbox), the GC outsold the Xbox. Yes, GC has tailed off badly recently, so Xbox will end up with more sales overall. But a sale of a console at the end of its life is not nearly as valueable as a sale at the start of its life. This is because you have less time to buy games on this console before you replace it with another. And since the money is made on the games...
I think that given that N didn't give money away with each console, and yet the Xbox barely outsold the GC, the GC has to be considered the more succesful console.
Additionally, remember that when N introed the GC, they spoke of not even needing 3rd party developers for their platform. They did accept some 3rd party developers, but it's true, they don't have nearly as much shovelware as the PS2, or even as much as the Xbox. How much did that hurt them?
As to other posters saying that N screwed up with their design, I think that's wrong. Yes, they didn't go for the total technological slam dunk, but by leaving stuff off, they may have increased their profit. N said, do you really need another DVD player, and I think they were right. The smaller size of the unit certainly saved them money in production and shipping.
I do recognize that MS did make some investments. Yeah, I'm sure they own racks of obsolete PCs that ocmprise the Live infrastructure. But really, the only think they gained from that was experience. They also bought several developers in a big to get some quality exclusive games for their console in the early days. Sadly, that mostly means RARE and Oddworld Inhabitants, neither of which has made a decent game since MS owned them. And they surely didn't generate any kind of positive return. Bungie has worked well for them, they still may not have generated an actual profit themselves, but they definitely sold a lot of consoles, which brought other developers to Xbox, which put money in MS pocket. And there's that movie deal too... All in all, I'd say buying Bungie was a positive.
But all this investment in infrastructure is only useful it if makes them money in the long run. And there's no guarantee of that at all. It's quite possible MS has merely built up an infrastructure for releasing more money losers in the future.
And finally, Xbox may not out-and-out suck, but it more than makes up for it in money loss. It's huge, poorly designed and insecure to boot! Also, it's the only current console that has had multiple primary controllers in its lifetime. And it is definitely because the first version of the controller out and out sucked.
We'll see how 360 ends up. It has to do a lot better than Xbox has in order to justify the huge losses MS has incurred. That's not guaranteed, but they sure seem to be in a lot better position to succeed than they were last time around. I'll be surprised if they lose as much on 360 as on Xbox, mostly because they seem to have designed it such that they aren't giving away money with the console this time around.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Immersive is nice, but it only applies to certain kinds of games. Many great games were never meant to be real. And many real-type games are not great.
Super Bomberman was one of the best games ever made, and it was not immersive. Most puzzle-type games are far from immersive.
In order to be good (or great), a game needs to be engaging like Super Bomberman is, like Robotron is, like Mario Kart is, like Halo at its best (not in the library) is.
Quake 2's immersion made it more engaging than it would have been otherwise. But it didn't seem to work for Doom 3. Doom 3 is immersive, but it's a long way from engaging.
As to PS3 not having an online service, how do you know that? Has Sony said? Personally, I think that PS3 will have good online play, even if it doesn't have an online service. PS2's online play has gone from awful to decent, and there's no reason to think it won't get even better with PS3.
As an aside (and perhaps a contentious point), do you prefer Gran Turismo 4 to Forza due to it's noticeably better graphics? Personally, I like them both, probably liking Forza's driving better, despite the oddly inferior graphics. I mean, Rallisport Challenge 2 looked better than Forza! What happened?
Finally, did you like God of War? Great game. Best game in a while, very engaging. It's graphics are good, not quite Xbox quality in resolution of textures or models. But in other ways, the graphics are utilized well that it sets a standard no Xbox platformer can touch (perhaps GC's Metroid Prime comes close though).
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Don't get me wrong here - I LOVE Halo! - but it's pretty pathetic that it's the only reason people buy Xbox. I know it's a big cash cow for them, but they're milking that sucker dry as a bone. They've already got Halo 1 and 2, Halo action figures, and, soon, a Halo movie and Halo 3 - if they don't get some other games in there to help it out, it's gonna flop because, yeah, people love playing Halo but it's only a matter of time before PS has something just as cool. And when you're buying a console, what are you gonna buy - the one that has a huge lineup of games or the one that has Halo and "that other game that looked pretty cool in the commercial"?
www.linuxpenguin.net
As to PS3 not having an online service, how do you know that? Has Sony said? Personally, I think that PS3 will have good online play, even if it doesn't have an online service. PS2's online play has gone from awful to decent, and there's no reason to think it won't get even better with PS3.
They don't have an online system now. So what that means is that their online system is at best a year away.
they really missed the boat with that. XBox Live is awesome.
Re: Immersion: I speak not of graphics per se. PS2 games sometimes feel limited by the hardware. I don't feel this playing Xbox games. The Xbox limitation is its library.
Immersion!=Realism. XBox games tend to feel more immersive to me. That said, MSFT lacks library variety.
My friends and I all begrudgingly admit that the respecitve consoles have strengths and weaknesses. XBox can't afford any weaknesses as it has an uphill fight in terms of market share.
un burrito me trampeó.
Except the part where Sony couldn't have an online system in less than a year. It isn't particularly difficult to set one up. They just need a game that makes people want to get on it. Sony has several front-line titles that could probably swing this.
For what it matters, Sony say the PS3 is a year away in the US (probably more like 11 months) anyway. So even if it takes a year like you say, it won't hold them back here.
Live is okay. I dunno about awesome. It'd perhaps be awesome if they had a better way of being sure you're not playing against asswipes. I mean, they don't really ban cheaters or anything on Live. So it's the same as any other slice of internet gamers, which just isn't worth paying for to me. It is great for playing games against your friends. But it doesn't take Live to allow you to make up buddy lists. I just don't see the cost value in Live.
I suppose PS2 games are struggling against hardware more often the Xbox games, more and more lately. But Xbox has this problem too somewhat, witness lack of HD in Forza and presence of it in GT4. But when I play a game like God of War I realize that the hardware doesn't have nearly as much influence as to how fun or engaging a game is as it might appear.
Xbox 360 has limitations, for sure. Some are already enumerated. But there's no reason to think that PS3 will be without limitations any than the later console (Xbox) in this round was.
Honestly, I'm prepared to be disappointed by both machines. The cost of making a game that fully utilizes either of them will be so high that it I truly think few titles (A-list titles) will attempt it. Heck, J Allard has already said not to judge 360 by the first titles, and I can see why, with things like the Madden that has been shown. MS is moving first, but it's very possible that the platform will just sit still while we wait for titles that justify its existence. This is very common for platforms that are launched simultaneous instead of coming out first in one area (typically Japan) and building up a database of titles there before world-wide release. The DS, PSP and Xbox all have suffered from this and it looks like 360 is going to follow along.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
It seems to me that they are using a type of pseudocode, and, in fact, the ? defines an if loop, meaning that they just created a unending loop.
If the PS3 can promise immersion and variety, then I'm there. It'll be an easy call. I'm already going to get an XBox 360 because PS3 missed the boat by not having an online service.
I don't see it as missing a boat at all. I see it as not needing to spend $10 (or whatever the cost is now) a month for the rest of my life just to play online games... there are a number of PS2 games with online play too; it's just up to the companies to provide the servers instead of Sony. It's that they've chosen a whole different boat to be on.
Personally I like that approach a lot more since I only irregularily play online games now and have come to detest any form of recurring payment. I do realize the benefits of having a centralized service such as comprehensive buddy lists and invites that can appear while you're in the middle of some other game... but I just don't need it, and sometimes I wonder how many other people really do.
I also see the scary things that can happen like your XBox being forever denied entry to Live if it's hacked. To me it does not seem desireable that a company that makes a thing I buy should so easily be able to remove such a degree of value so easily.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I read this comment and I just laugh. Make the game look as bad as it can possibly look, just because graphics can't yet be distinguished from reality? Why the hell would you do that?
Joseph?
In the next gen I don't know if the PS3 or 360 will come out on top. But I do know, in number of units, the Revolution will be in a firm second place as it offers a very comelling reason to have two consoles.
I don't own a Gamecube right now because while it has some good games, it's just a little too much like the other consoles and I was always satisfied with my PS2.
Now in the next gen I know I'll have a PS3 and a Revolution. And it makes me wonder - is whatever console that does not come out on top almost gauranteed to be in third place this time round?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If the game is fun then I tend to not notice if it has pillarboxes on the sides of the picture and just have fun playing.
Don't worry. Select games have supported anamorphic display modes since at least the Nintendo 64. Notably, Goldeneye 007 had an anamorphic mode.
Sega probably did fail because of marketing. The Christmas season of 2000 was where they totally failed. PS2 had been anounced, but wasn't available. Dreamcasts were plentiful and had tons of great games (Soul Calibur on Dreamcast is still better than PS2 versions). But Sega didn't market it. There were no commercials on TV for it. They didn't tout it as an alternative to waiting for PS2. So no one bought it. Everyone I know who had a Dreamcast loved the games on it (Sonic Adventure, Soul Calibur, Jet Set Radio, various sports games, Shenmue I and II, Crazy Taxi, Resident Evil: Code Veronica, Skies of Arcadia, Sakura Taisen series, Napple Tale, Vib Ribbon, Space Channel 5, Psychic Force 2012, Rival Schools, Guilty Gear X, and tons more). PS2 didn't get that many good games for it until years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast
My other first post is car post.
Quite simply, the kids who thought they were too good for a kiddy console have now at last reached a level of maturity where having Pikachu in something does not automatically sell it. They now hate and despise the rat, and the only consoles where you can beat the crap out of the bugger and his pals are Nintendo's.
Basically, as it stands the well informed crowd, "gamers", are pretty aware that the hype surrounding all the players may not be what it cracks up to be. We know that Microsoft will pour money upon the Xbox 360 win, lose, or draw. We know Nintendo will make some incredible games for its controller even if everyone else either botches their attempts or doesn't bother, and we know Sony will ride on the popularity of the PS2. Everything else is hype, speculation, or insanity.
However, it is the casual crowd, the people who watch MTV, the people who still play nothing but Tetris, the people playing the Sims, the people who play the cheesy games on their cells phones and generally the people who are scared of using anything beyond Internet Explorer, Word, and Outlook Express on their PC that are the target of the three companies.
Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft all know that the casual game player doesn't read Slashdot, doesn't hear the word of mouth, and doesn't have any preconceptions about one system over another. Each is targeting these untapped fountain of cash with their crosshairs. Sony plans on using their tech hype and previous popularity, Microsoft is using a jump start on the competition and MTV (casual players are not going to buy more than one system), Nintendo is simply targeting everyone under the sun with a controller people will look at and not be as afraid of as the calculator on Windows.
All the speculation we have here is from a crowd who, for the most part, know what's going on. Biases included, we know more than Joe Somebody on the street when it comes to this. We've already decided which system we'll be getting, and nothing save from a miracle or a tragic mistake is going to change our minds. As such, the big three are only focusing on avoiding blundering with people like us, and and working to get the casual people into the game.
We laugh at the Halo 3 comparison, because we know all the sweeter, juicier FPSs there are. The casual crowd doesn't, they know Halo. Don't underestimate the casual players, they outnumber us, and they more than anyone else will be the determining factor in who comes out on top this coming generation, whether you measure success in marketshare, profit or both.
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
Saying that homebrewed software is completly irrevelant to gamers, is like saying that open-source is irrevelant to gamers.
Maybe most gamers don't install Linux or haven't even heard of opensource.
But just look on how many games today are using OGG/vorbis for sound.
And how many servers a gamers encounters do run Linux and/or Apache.
Less restriction helps bringing more interesting uses for the end user, even if the user himself doesn't directly use them.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Vib Ribbon did not come out for Dreamcast. I was thinking of Rez.
My other first post is car post.
The controller argument is totally subjective. I loved the Dreamcast controller, but find the Nintendo Wavebird to be one of the gratest controllers ever made. I absolutely hate the PSX Dual Shock, but prefer the standard PSX pads. I like neither as much as the DC pad or Wavebird, which is ironic because I own more PSX games than anything else (with my Dreamcast and PC Engine being very close in number of games). And none of it has anything to do with hand size. So let's stop even going there (I'm 6' 5").
It just did not seem that powerful to me at the time, both from what I had read and demo games I had played in the stores. It just was not compelling.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'd kinda have to question this. I mean, either way, the compiler should flag them as different types. They have different class members (namely, the Xbox/360 has subobjects for advanced media playback and code signing), and is generally much more rounded out and stable.
I've always considered the Xbox (orig.) to be Dreamcast 2.0 - the Dreamcast ran WinCE, and it's a safe bet MS was already working hard to jump in the market through them. I think the best way to describe the relationship is as versions of a class. The designers, however, are pretty poor - the first official version had no backward compatibility with the DC public beta, and they are now offering some, but not all, compatibility with the new, oddly numbered, v3.60.
i loved my dreamcast to bad it was seen as failure and the games dried up
http://www.npcgaming.com Dedicated Gaming Servers
For those that are curious, the alpha version of Half-life for the Dreamcast managed to escape after the project was cancelled. Yes, there is a torrent. I haven't tried it, but those that did report various sound issues and that the game pauses to load every other room you enter. It's more of a curiosity than a playable game.
where the comment ends and sig begins
fag. I Pwn U
"do you prefer Gran Turismo 4 to Forza due to it's noticeably better graphics? Personally, I like them both, probably liking Forza's driving better, despite the oddly inferior graphics."
Looks like someone put the game names wrong way around. You were supposed to say Forza has better graphics.
http://msxbox-world.com/Forza_Vs_GT4.php
An ovbious mistake mind you seeing as how hyped GT4 was.
Have you metaroderated recently?
/cue the themesong
"Chu chu rocket! Kaneko wakka-wa!"
Loved the DC for the games. Soul Calibur II, Phantasy Star Online, and Samba de Amigo (+4 sets o' maracas) to name the three that occupied way too much of my time in college.
Of course had I bought one at launch, I would've been sorely disappointed in my purchase.
Looks like someone put the game names wrong way around. You were supposed to say Forza has better graphics.
Eh, who cares. It's very clear that Burnout Revenge is better than both. It's faster, it doesn't have crashes that go thud, and it has the best graphics of the lot. :P
I'm a COBOL programmer, you insensitive clod.
Amen to that, Burnout Revenge is awesome but it's pretty lame compared to Burnout 3. In revenge you can just smash through traffic. Takes away the skill that was required in Burnout 3.
Have you metaroderated recently?
How is the 360 like the Dreamcast? If your speaking metaphorically then its probably similar, but in any other way its not.
The Dreamcast was, in its day, a rather revolutionary game console. The design methology used in the DC is the same methology being employeed with the latest breed of next-gen machines like the 360, PS3 and Nintendo Revolution. If this is what makes the 360 similar then I'd have to admit its true but its not nearly enough.
That methology called for the use of PC technology; yes the Dreamcast used PC technology. It used the NEC PowerVR graphics chipset, competitior to the now defunct 3Dfx Voodoo graphics chipset. Its OS was a modified version of Windows CE! Another DC innovation was in the design of the game save carts which were themselves miniture handheld game devices. You could turn your DC game save cart into a virtual pet by transfering a Chao from "Sonic Adventure" to it. You can do that with SA on the Gamecube with the GBA. Had Sega been able to acquire better support, most development houses got burned when they developed for the Saturn, the DC probably would have been a better success. Its PowerVR GPU made it one of the best looking consoles on the market with superior 3D graphics support over the PS2 and Nintendo 64. The DC still lives today in the form of arcade hardware manufatured by Sega's still-alive-and-kicking arcade games department.
I would like to see Sega release a Dreamcast development system for the general public to help foster a new age of ameteur game development projects. The DC could live on with NEW games built and designed by DC fans. You could go online, download games and store them on a hard drive built into the dev kit addon for the console. Its an interesting idea.
I have a question? Did Sony ever design a ameteur game development version of the PS2 like they did with the PS1?
Michael "TheZorch" Haney
thezorch@gmail.com
http://thezorch.googlepages.com/home
So, you build 100m xbox's sell em, have 100m customers all on broadband in the lounge room.
Now, its 100% interactive, fast, and you have a way to charge and make dollars.
You have no successfully displaced all CABLE-TV corps, TELCO-CORPS, MUSIC-RETAILERS, total market, oh ~$100billion +
Now on xb0x360-live, I bet that come december + , you will be able to buy broadband delivered games 60% margins there,
broadband delivered tvshows/movies (no Sony movies though), lots of music like itunes, xtunes? again no sony music.
xbox360 is THE interactive settop box with no dependance on satelites/cable - just the internet.
Add in IPTV and then he can start selling cable tv, with no wires needed. But instead of 500 channels and $99/pm, you
pay per tvshow or series at your own leasure.
360tv, 360music, 360games, 360voip, 360shopping
Before anyone blinks, presto all the majors have no choice but to play ball with MS, since they will have NO infrastructure, or if they dared, it would cost em 5 years profits to make one.
the 360 will be like having a startrek computer at home, at your service to deliver anything.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
ps. PS2 online games work just fine. For free.
little sense means sense 0. Hence, sense = 0 fulfills that condition. There you go!
what the heck? should've previewed that post before posting.
Assuming things can't make negative sense, little sense means sense < delta for some delta > 0. If sense == 0, then our condition is verified. QED
To be honest, since neither "standard" is really available at this point, who cares if the Xbox 360 is compatable with these new standards or not at this point? It's possible that if Microsoft supported either of them, the standard would change before a single movie was released on it and the Xbox 360 still wouldn't be compatable, even though that was the idea.
Now, Microsoft didn't make a ton of money with MS Windows 2.x. Did any of you really hear about MS Windows prior to the 3.0 days? A big thing is that Microsoft managed to work up the support for the MS Windows platform(s) over time. With the consoles, a key is that they are a work in progress. What weaknesses were seen with the original Xbox get worked on for the 360, then for the Xbox 720 or whatever they call the following generation. With each new generation, there will be more support as long as MS doesn't drop the ball and take a step backwards.
You can expect that along with working on compatability with the original Xbox titles, there will be more similarities to the Win32 platform so game companies can develop for both platforms if Microsoft would allow it.
PC gaming is slowly becomming the platform for the non-action games while action games move to the console. It's just the nature of these things if you think about it. I don't see consoles as being aimed at the gamer who prefers THINKING about what they are going to do next rather than the action gamer. First person shooters will probably all move to the console in time, games like Civilization, Sim City, and other strategy games that don't require fast reflexes will be where PC gaming will end up. True RPGs will also probably stay on the PC platform where having a lot of options and the need for a larger number of controls is more natural. Would a console have any luck with a full keyboard as a part of the standard controller package? That's the power of the PC, game companies arn't limited in how many options are available at once. If you want 15 different weapons or tools to be available all at the same time, that's possible on a PC. With a console, the UI would need to support that, and that's asking a lot.
I think you made a typo and wrote "Super" where you really meant to write "Saturn."
Casual gamers, otherwise known as the biggest segment of the console market?
---PCJ
It's fantastic (and available on GC). And this is better?
Whether this is better or not, I'll go seek it out. There just aren't enough good shooters nowadays.
Thanks for the tip.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Thanks. I didn't make a mistake here. Play the New York level on GT4 in (pseudo) 1080i on PS2. Then play the New York level on Forza on Xbox in 480p.
Yes, the PS2 version is a bit flickery (the curse of the PS2), but it's definitely better looking. The textures are higher res, the cars look better, the road surface looks better (although is actually less detailed).
Don't get me wrong, Forza is a great game, in many ways better than GT4. But the graphics are inferior. The track area looks washed out, the textures are low res, the GAME is low res (no HD), the car models are not as pleasing as GT4 (although pretty damn good), and everything outside the track area is less detailed than on GT4.
It's shocking to me, since Rallisport Challenge 2 is the best looking racing game on any console and this is made by the same people on the same console. Why did the graphics drop in quality so much? And how come no HDTV support? It kind of looks to me like they just ran out of time to spend on it.
It doesn't matter too much, it has little effect on game play. The track/walls muddiness makes it difficult to discern the track ahead in certain circumstances (like the street course track, Australia?) but honestly in these kind of games, you have to memorize the tracks to do well anyway, so it's not a big deal in the end. Other than that, it creates no problems.
But that doesn't make it not so.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
I'm so used to the first 3 burnout games (damn them for ditching the Gamecube after #2) that Revenge is quite hard because I instinctively avoid cars or slip between them instead of taking them out.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
Or TG-16/DUO/PC-Engine.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
Pick up PowerStone 2. It rocks.
Look, I don't hack my consoles at all. I am just saying I do not like the thought of paying anything per month, forever, where the other side gets to disable a primary use of my console at any time the like. What if a hacker uses rotating ID's from various consoles to access Live and happens to get mine disabled? Since most of the valuation of an XBox lies in Live, it would make the console almost worthless. Furthermore it makes it almost impossible to buy an XBox used as you have no idea if that particular XBox has been locked through no fault of your own.
Really though I'm not interested because, as I said, I simply do not want any recurring costs in my life. It looks small to you but you have to pay it forever and that does not look small to me. So I prefer the Sony model where games individually provide networking support and I can play for free (or not) as I please.
It's just rude to assume I'm against the remote manipulation of my console because I want to cheat, when I have no desire to do so. Are you for the ability for media companies to remotley disable your DVD player? It's exactly the same principal I'm standing for.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Microsoft lost $4 billion on sales of 20 million units. That means that they lost $200 per unit - just as if they gave a console + game away for free to each user of the Xbox.
That as may be, they didn't "literally" give the X-Box away. Didn't you get the point of (or even bother reading) what I said in my post? I thought it was pretty clear.
Saying that "Microsoft were/are giving the XBox away" is justified as artistic license. Saying that they were "literally" doing that is just wrong. (Bangs head against wall)
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
True, but sometimes you just feel like running into things and smash them up good. :D
:)
Playing Burnout Revenge gives you a visceral thrill few other games can match, but I agree it's not very skill-oriented. Personally, I have very little patience for racers in general, especially the Gran Turismos of this world. They may be close to life, but to me, they're just dull.
The link in question refers to a hoax, but piracy IS possible on the GC...
2 75>As this article indicates...
http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=
So, before you go on, I am right about the, "it did nothing to help" comment about the discs- and they did themselves out of a market segment right out of the gate by doing it.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
literally Pronunciation: 'li-t&-r&-lE, 'li-tr&-lE, 'li-t&r-lE Function: adverb 1 : in a literal sense or manner : ACTUALLY 2 : in effect : VIRTUALLY usage Since some people take sense 2 to be the opposite of sense 1, it has been frequently criticized as a misuse. Instead, the use is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis, but it often appears in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary.
I get the feeling that this is where the misuse has become accepted as use. Personally, I think (correct or not) that it's pretty stupid and that the phrase "in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary" was pretty spot-on with respect to the XBox situation...
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Hey, M$ might actually be moving in the right direction. People actually liked the DC. No matter. What matters most in the end is the games. If the games suck, people remember the console as sucky. If the games are good, people remember the console as good. And Halo 3, various violent bloody M rated games, and sports games don't seem like a variety of good games to me. Vive le NES!
PS2 came out a year early also it had more similaritys to Dreamcast(aw but thats just smart marketing for sony Huh(.) At least Mirosoft is stepping up to the plate,not making orther countries wait a year while we enjoy XBOX 360 power so can they.
I think that you are taking things too literally 8)
|Believe it or not, the gaming business isn't about giving you and your friends fun games to play, it's about making money.
This is overly cynical. Surely its about both? Gaming & Business? If it ain't fun, its not going to sell. Sure stockholders are the raison d'etre for many companies, but without the appeal and functionality of the actual product, whos going to buy from them?
I know there is a widely-claimed dearth of creativity in the gaming industry right now, and the most successful franchises are exactly that: franchises which replicate with minor improvements on an established model largely guaranteed to sell, BUT a lucrative market is only lucrative because the demand (i.e the desire for the enjoyable, interesting, satisfying, thrilling or otherwise stimulating experience that "video" games provide) is strong, and in the case of computer games, there is a very high standard and associated high cost to create or develop. Maybe the initial costs inhibits certain experiments and games, but the high standard does goes long way to assure that when you plonk your £39.99 on the latest and greatest home entertainment extravaganza, you'll be enjoying a relatively polished product.
Perhaps your own disillusionment is giving vent to a cynicism that perhaps not all game developers share? Or am I in the hippie no-mans-land of starry-eyed shareware developers and delusionally devoted console fanboys in believing that truly unique, thrilling AND successful games are the product of hard work and genuine passion backed by the large resources that the unique mass-appeal of these strange gaming experiences we enjoy can generate?
XBOX 360 will be amazing...don't even try to knock it!!! come get an XBOX 360 for free!!! www.dingodot.com gogogogogogo check it out now!!! also, free money for online poker, free stock tips, music, and so much more!!!! GOOOO!!! www.dingodot.com